Re: [PATCH] getsockopt() early argument sanity checking

From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:34:43 +0200

> Doing a check that is inherently racy everywhere doesn't seem like a
> security improvement to me. If there is really a length checking bug
> somewhere it needs to be fixed in a race-free way. If not then there
> is no need for a change.

Totally agreed, this change makes no sense on every level.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] getsockopt() early argument sanity checking
    • From: Solar Designer <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] getsockopt() early argument sanity checking
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] getsockopt() early argument sanity checking
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] getsockopt() early argument sanity checking
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] getsockopt() early argument sanity checking
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]