[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:0.019 / U:0.732 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site