On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 15:08 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:10:33 -0700
>
> > @@ -692,12 +692,17 @@ void __sock_recv_timestamp(struct msghdr *msg, struct
> > sock *sk,
> > ktime_to_timespec_cond(shhwtstamps->hwtstamp, tss.ts + 2))
> >
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:10:33 -0700
> @@ -692,12 +692,17 @@ void __sock_recv_timestamp(struct msghdr *msg, struct
> sock *sk,
> ktime_to_timespec_cond(shhwtstamps->hwtstamp, tss.ts + 2))
> empty = 0;
> if (!empty) {
> + unsigned int
On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 09:01 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 16:41 +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 4:25 PM, 쪼르 wrote:
> > > It seems that attacker can leak kernel memory(slab) by this vulnerability.
> > > I make a PoC code, and it works well on
> > > ae50d
On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 16:41 +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 4:25 PM, 쪼르 wrote:
> > It seems that attacker can leak kernel memory(slab) by this vulnerability.
> > I make a PoC code, and it works well on
> > ae50dfd61665086e617cc9e554a1285d52765670.
> > but, I found that PoC wa
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 4:25 PM, 쪼르 wrote:
> It seems that attacker can leak kernel memory(slab) by this vulnerability.
> I make a PoC code, and it works well on
> ae50dfd61665086e617cc9e554a1285d52765670.
> but, I found that PoC wasn't work on Ubuntu16.04.02 4.4.0-64-generic
> #85-Ubuntu SMP.
D
