[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Linux
On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 06:29:25PM +0100, Nick Warne wrote:
> On 13/05/06, Adrian Bunk <> wrote:
> >The CVE should be enough for easily getting all information you
> >requested.
> >
> >Information whether it's a DoS or a root exploit is helpful, but any
> >qualified person doing risk management will anyways lookup the CVE.
> Well, yes, but some people do *actually* use the latest kernel at home
> and not in labs (et al), and as Maciej asked, we are not sure whether
> the (whatever) latest patch is needed or not on whatever our current
> config is the way the latest stable fixes are announced.
> " [PATCH] fs/locks.c: Fix lease_init (CVE-2006-1860)
> It is insane to be giving lease_init() the task of freeing the lock it is
> supposed to initialise, given that the lock is not guaranteed to be
> allocated on the stack. This causes lockups in fcntl_setlease().
> Problem diagnosed by Daniel Hokka Zakrisson <>
> Also fix a slab leak in __setlease() due to an uninitialised return
> value.
> Problem diagnosed by Bj????rn Steinbrink.
> "
> OK, great. But what does it mean?
> It would be nice to have a short explanation of what the fix is for in
> real world terms.

To be fair, the extra work of writing out a detailed exploit, complete
with example code, for every security update, would just take way too
long. If you look for where this patch was discussed on lkml, you will
see a full description of the problem, and how to hit it.


greg k-h
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-05-14 06:04    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean