netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] fix missing security_*() check in net/compat.c

To: Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix missing security_*() check in net/compat.c
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:40:53 -0800
Cc: jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx, mitch@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, chrisw@xxxxxxxx, sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20041130090634.Y2357@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20041130145444.GF63669@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Xine.LNX.4.44.0411301117010.12330-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041130090634.Y2357@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:06:34 -0800
Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> * James Morris (jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Mitchell Blank Jr wrote:
> > 
> > > While looking at the SCM passing code in net/core/scm.c I noticed that 
> > > there's
> > > a 32-bit compat implementation of scm_detach_fds()'s called 
> > > scm_detach_fds_compat() living in net/compat.c.  While these two functions
> > > are mostly the same the latter does not include the call to the
> > > security_file_receive() hook which is almost certainly a bug.
> > > 
> > > My sparc64 test box isn't set up currently so this is not tested.  Someone
> > > running a 64-bit kernel with CONFIG_COMPAT should verify that this at
> > > least compiles.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Looks correct to me.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Yup, looks fine.

Applied, thanks everyone.

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