[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 07/11] Memory compaction core
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Andrew Morton wrote:

> > ...except that we've seen a fair number of null pointer dereference
> > exploits that have told us something altogether different. Are we
> > *sure* we don't want to test for null pointers...?
> >
> It's hard to see what the test gains us really - the kernel has
> zillions of pointer derefs, any of which could be NULL if we have a
> bug. Are we more likely to have a bug here than elsewhere?
> This one will oops on a plain old read, so it's a bit moot in this
> case.

If the object pointed to is larger than page size and we are
referencing a member with an offset larger than page size later then we
may create an exploit without checks.

But the structure here is certainly smaller than that. So no issue here.

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-03-24 22:23    [W:0.086 / U:3.220 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site