LVS
lvs-devel
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: [PATCH 12/26] netfilter: switch nf_setsockopt to sockptr_t

To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/26] netfilter: switch nf_setsockopt to sockptr_t
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, coreteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sctp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-hams@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-bluetooth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-can@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dccp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-decnet-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-wpan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mptcp@xxxxxxxxxxxx, lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rds-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-afs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tipc-discussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-x25@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 18:23:57 +0200
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 06:16:32PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Maybe sockptr_advance should have some safety checks and sometimes
> return -EFAULT? Or you should always use the implementation where
> being a kernel address is an explicit bit of sockptr_t, rather than
> being implicit?

I already have a patch to use access_ok to check the whole range in
init_user_sockptr.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>