Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-192920-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 21:06:39 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: cve@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-cve-announce@vger.kernel.org,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: CVE-2023-52734: net: sched: sch: Bounds check priority
Message-ID: <2024052824-justice-lair-14e6@gregkh>
References: <2024052100-CVE-2023-52734-c8c2@gregkh>
 <ZlWNaIMC3NCkIFxv@tiehlicka>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZlWNaIMC3NCkIFxv@tiehlicka>

On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 09:53:12AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Is this really soemthing that should be getting a CVE assigned?
> First the fix is incomplete - 9cec2aaffe96 ("net: sched: sch: Fix off by one in htb_activate_prios()")

Incomplete fixes are still part of a fix :)

> Second is this even real problem? https://lore.kernel.org/all/Y9V3mBmLUcrEdrTV@pop-os.localdomain/
> suggests it is not.

Ah, good catch, I didn't see that.  I'll go revoke this as it's not
doing anything.

> And third, WARN_ONs are considered a real deal by CVE team because
> somebody might be running with panic_on_warn. This patch adds one!

Yes, but if you can't hit that by anything from userspace, it's not an
issue and just dead code.  We'll have to wait for a future syzbot report
to prove that wrong :)

thanks for the review!

greg k-h