On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 03:27:42PM -0800, Brandeburg, Jesse wrote:
> a counter patch, without atomic ops, since we are protected by napi when 
> modifying this variable.
> 
> Originally From: Neil Horman <[email protected]>
> Modified by: Jesse Brandeburg <[email protected]>
> 
> <original message>
> Hey all-
>       A security discussion was recently given:
> http://events.ccc.de/congress/2009/Fahrplan//events/3596.en.html
> And a patch that I submitted awhile back was brought up.  Apparently some of
> their testing revealed that they were able to force a buffer fragment in e1000
> in which the trailing fragment was greater than 4 bytes.  As a result the
> fragment check I introduced failed to detect the fragement and a partial
> invalid frame was passed up into the network stack.  I've written this patch
> to correct it.  I'm in the process of testing it now, but it makes good
> logical sense to me.  Effectively it maintains a per-adapter state variable
> which detects a non-EOP frame, and discards it and subsequent non-EOP frames
> leading up to _and_ _including_ the next positive-EOP frame (as it is by
> definition the last fragment).  This should prevent any and all partial frames
> from entering the network stack from e1000.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Brandeburg <[email protected]>
Seems like a fine alternative to me.  Thanks!
Acked-by: Neil Horman <[email protected]>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev 
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel

Reply via email to