On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 01:39:57PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > This is inspired by a5cc68f3d6 "af_key: fix info leaks in notify > messages". There are some struct members which don't get initialized > and could disclose small amounts of private information. > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > I'm at the "monkey see, monkey do" level of understanding this code so > let me know if I've missed something. > > diff --git a/net/key/af_key.c b/net/key/af_key.c > index 456b262..e939d32 100644 > --- a/net/key/af_key.c > +++ b/net/key/af_key.c > @@ -2081,6 +2081,7 @@ static int pfkey_xfrm_policy2msg(struct sk_buff *skb, const struct xfrm_policy * > pol->sadb_x_policy_type = IPSEC_POLICY_NONE; > } > pol->sadb_x_policy_dir = dir+1; > + pol->sadb_x_policy_reserved = 0; > pol->sadb_x_policy_id = xp->index; > pol->sadb_x_policy_priority = xp->priority; > > @@ -3137,7 +3138,9 @@ static int pfkey_send_acquire(struct xfrm_state *x, struct xfrm_tmpl *t, struct > pol->sadb_x_policy_exttype = SADB_X_EXT_POLICY; > pol->sadb_x_policy_type = IPSEC_POLICY_IPSEC; > pol->sadb_x_policy_dir = XFRM_POLICY_OUT + 1; > + pol->sadb_x_policy_reserved = 0; > pol->sadb_x_policy_id = xp->index; > + pol->sadb_x_policy_priority = 0; Userspace seems not to care, but the correct setting would be pol->sadb_x_policy_priority = xp->priority; So maybe we should send the right priority to userspace, just for the case that anyone is interested in it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
