Re: [PATCH] net: mark DECnet as broken

2016-04-10 Thread David Miller
From: Vegard Nossum Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 09:22:43 +0200 > There are NULL pointer dereference bugs in DECnet which can be triggered > by unprivileged users and have been reported multiple times to LKML, > however nobody seems confident enough in the proposed fixes to

Re: [PATCH] net: mark DECnet as broken

2016-04-07 Thread David Miller
From: One Thousand Gnomes Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:01:20 +0100 > On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 09:22:43 +0200 > Vegard Nossum wrote: > >> There are NULL pointer dereference bugs in DECnet which can be triggered >> by unprivileged users and have been

Re: [PATCH] net: mark DECnet as broken

2016-04-07 Thread One Thousand Gnomes
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 09:22:43 +0200 Vegard Nossum wrote: > There are NULL pointer dereference bugs in DECnet which can be triggered > by unprivileged users and have been reported multiple times to LKML, > however nobody seems confident enough in the proposed fixes to

Re: [PATCH] net: mark DECnet as broken

2016-04-07 Thread James Cameron
On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 09:22:43AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote: > There are NULL pointer dereference bugs in DECnet which can be triggered > by unprivileged users and have been reported multiple times to LKML, > however nobody seems confident enough in the proposed fixes to merge them > and the

[PATCH] net: mark DECnet as broken

2016-04-07 Thread Vegard Nossum
There are NULL pointer dereference bugs in DECnet which can be triggered by unprivileged users and have been reported multiple times to LKML, however nobody seems confident enough in the proposed fixes to merge them and the consensus seems to be that nobody cares enough about DECnet to see it