Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-188856-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 17:27:39 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Jiri Bohac <jbohac@suse.cz>
Cc: cve@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-cve-announce@vger.kernel.org,
	Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>, kexec@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: CVE-2023-52823: kernel: kexec: copy user-array safely
Message-ID: <2024052431-decline-limes-da66@gregkh>
References: <2024052106-CVE-2023-52823-3d81@gregkh>
 <ZlBlorsBMPK0RdnR@dwarf.suse.cz>
 <2024052420-clang-flatterer-366b@gregkh>
 <ZlCKLBjrF5PWt1hz@dwarf.suse.cz>
 <ZlCgoTr27AT_eg9A@dwarf.suse.cz>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZlCgoTr27AT_eg9A@dwarf.suse.cz>

On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 04:13:53PM +0200, Jiri Bohac wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 02:38:04PM +0200, Jiri Bohac wrote:
> > On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 12:15:47PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > Nice, but then why was this commit worded this way?  Now we check twice?
> > > Double safe?  Should it be reverted?
> > 
> > double safe's good; turning it into a CVE not so much :(
> > CVE-2023-52822, CVE-2023-52824 and CVE-2023-52820, originally from the same patch
> > series, seem to be the exact same case.
> 
> Same thing: CVE-2023-52758

Agreed, now rejected, thanks for the review!

greg k-h