Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 07:14:58 -0500 From: Dan Rosenberg <dan.j.rosenberg@...il.com> To: Petr Matousek <pmatouse@...hat.com> Cc: coley@...us.mitre.org, oss-security@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: CVE request: kernel: gdth: integer overflow in ioc_general() > > #define SIZE 0x10000029aUL > > ... > volatile unsigned long t = SIZE; // volatile so that it does not get optimised (error) > > printk("nada: %lx\n", current_thread_info()->addr_limit.seg); > printk("nada2: %lx\n", access_ok(VERIFY_READ, 0, t)); > printk("nada3: %lx\n", t); > printk("nada4: %lx\n", t > UINT_MAX); > ... > > nada: ffff810000000000 > nada2: 1 > nada3: 10000029a > nada4: 1 > Huh. Learn something new every day, I suppose. I wonder if this is kernel version or architecture dependent? In either case, ignore my previous statement, unless someone else sees anything fishy going on.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.