Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\]\s+IPV6_CHECKSUM\s+socket\s+option\s+can\s+corrupt\s+kernel\s+memory\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\]\s+IPV6_CHECKSUM\s+socket\s+option\s+can\s+corrupt\s+kernel\s+memory\s*$/: 28 ]

Total 28 documents matching your query.

1. [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: David Stevens <dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:41:25 -0600; I was doing some testing with IPV6_CHECKSUM and started getting memory corruption (panic when the socket was closed). The bug originally manifested itself as a the "csum" pointer in rawv6_push_pendin; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00517.html (11,978 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 09:53:08 +0900 (JST); Please geive up the "singed-off" line. Anyway, how about this? Signed-off-by: Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> == net/ipv6/raw.c 1.80 vs edited == -- 1.80/net/ipv6/raw.c 2005-03-27 08:04:3; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00519.html (11,375 bytes)
3. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:45:34 -0700; YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 05:53:08 PM: Signed-off-by: David L Stevens <dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx> csum has to be a pointer into the packet data, so it can store the check; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00521.html (11,933 bytes)
4. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 13:05:35 +0900 (JST); tp://ww; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00523.html (10,763 bytes)
5. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:07:06 -0700; -ipv6.o; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00525.html (11,491 bytes)
6. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: ote@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:26:13 +1000; no dou; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00550.html (18,487 bytes)
7. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:34:32 +0900 (JST); f skb_c; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00551.html (10,798 bytes)
8. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: n <ganesh.venkatesan@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:36:46 -0600; ing iss; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00557.html (11,476 bytes)
9. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: Starr <shawn.starr@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 07:30:40 +1000; Apr 13; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00561.html (11,869 bytes)
10. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: u <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 15:43:37 -0700; f? This; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00562.html (12,183 bytes)
11. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: x>; Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:22:27 +1000; rian --; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00564.html (13,021 bytes)
12. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: u <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:31:38 -0700; e rawv6; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00565.html (13,014 bytes)
13. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: Stevens <dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:41:02 +1000; alls ra; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00566.html (10,905 bytes)
14. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: Jean Tourrilhes <jt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:42:56 -0700; cause I; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00576.html (10,425 bytes)
15. [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: David Stevens <dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:41:25 -0600; I was doing some testing with IPV6_CHECKSUM and started getting memory corruption (panic when the socket was closed). The bug originally manifested itself as a the "csum" pointer in rawv6_push_pendin; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg01653.html (11,978 bytes)
16. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 09:53:08 +0900 (JST); Please geive up the "singed-off" line. Anyway, how about this? Signed-off-by: Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> == net/ipv6/raw.c 1.80 vs edited == -- 1.80/net/ipv6/raw.c 2005-03-27 08:04:3; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg01655.html (11,520 bytes)
17. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: David Stevens <dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:45:34 -0700; YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 04/12/2005 05:53:08 PM: Signed-off-by: David L Stevens <dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx> csum has to be a pointer into the packet data, so it can store the; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg01657.html (11,989 bytes)
18. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 13:05:35 +0900 (JST); Ok, understood. BTW, I remember that my first intention was that we restrict "checksum" should be placed within the first fragment. In this sense, rp->offset + 1 < len does not make sense to me, if t; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg01659.html (10,935 bytes)
19. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: David Stevens <dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:07:06 -0700; netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 04/12/2005 09:05:35 PM: <OF0A4F590E.3F5A449F-ON88256FE2.000E49F8-88256FE2.000F289A@xxxxxxx These aren't fragments in the packet sense, of course. These are just dif; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg01661.html (11,533 bytes)
20. Re: [PATCH] IPV6_CHECKSUM socket option can corrupt kernel memory (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:26:13 +1000; Yes it is possible to get nr_frags != 0. We also need to handle the case where there are multiple packets on sk_write_queue. So here is a patch that introduces skb_store_bits -- the opposite of skb_c; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg01686.html (18,597 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]