2.6.32-longterm review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------

From: Dan Rosenberg <[email protected]>

commit 9f260e0efa4766e56d0ac14f1aeea6ee5eb8fe83 upstream.

Since the socket address is just being used as a unique identifier, its
inode number is an alternative that does not leak potentially sensitive
information.

CC-ing stable because MITRE has assigned CVE-2010-4565 to the issue.

Signed-off-by: Dan Rosenberg <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Oliver Hartkopp <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>
Cc: Moritz Muehlenhoff <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>

---
 net/can/bcm.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/net/can/bcm.c
+++ b/net/can/bcm.c
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ struct bcm_sock {
        struct list_head tx_ops;
        unsigned long dropped_usr_msgs;
        struct proc_dir_entry *bcm_proc_read;
-       char procname [20]; /* pointer printed in ASCII with \0 */
+       char procname [32]; /* inode number in decimal with \0 */
 };
 
 static inline struct bcm_sock *bcm_sk(const struct sock *sk)
@@ -1519,7 +1519,7 @@ static int bcm_connect(struct socket *so
 
        if (proc_dir) {
                /* unique socket address as filename */
-               sprintf(bo->procname, "%p", sock);
+               sprintf(bo->procname, "%lu", sock_i_ino(sk));
                bo->bcm_proc_read = proc_create_data(bo->procname, 0644,
                                                     proc_dir,
                                                     &bcm_proc_fops, sk);


_______________________________________________
stable mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable

Reply via email to