From: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: [stable] [PATCH] stable - ext[234]: Avoid printk floods in the face of directory corruption (CVE-2008-3528) Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:21:08 -0500 Message-ID: <48FF52F4.10702@redhat.com> References: <48FF42B8.3030606@redhat.com> <20081022161433.GB29489@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: stable@kernel.org, ext4 development To: Greg KH Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:43384 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752204AbYJVQVP (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 12:21:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20081022161433.GB29489@kroah.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:11:52AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> This is a trivial backport of the following upstream commits: >> >> - bd39597cbd42a784105a04010100e27267481c67 (ext2) >> - cdbf6dba28e8e6268c8420857696309470009fd9 (ext3) >> - 9d9f177572d9e4eba0f2e18523b44f90dd51fe74 (ext4) >> >> This addresses CVE-2008-3528 >> >> ext[234]: Avoid printk floods in the face of directory corruption > > For what kernel releases is this applicable? .27? .26? .25? Earlier? Sorry.. it is applicable to pretty much any kernel in the past :) .27 certainly (that's what the patch is against), .26, .25.... yes. It's not a particularly dangerous condition - you have to somehow get the administrator to mount the filesystem before you can trigger the "exploit" (which is a DoS, essentially) - so, I don't know if it's worth porting back to the dawn of time... Thanks, -Eric > thanks, > > greg k-h