1: If you're on Debian Wheezy or Ubuntu 12.04, you're still affected.
The commit introducing this is actually from just before 3.2.
2: The patch was committed by a Red Hat employee, but was written by a Parallels employee.
sock_diag: Initial skeleton
author Pavel Emelyanov <email@example.com>
Tue, 6 Dec 2011 07:58:03 +0000 (07:58 +0000)
committer David S. Miller <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Tue, 6 Dec 2011 18:58:01 +0000 (13:58 -0500)
tree 267a65f626108423f73ef6dc0040b3b3171f7b45 tree | snapshot
parent f13c95f0e255e6d21762259875295cc212e6bc32 commit | diff
Now I'm off to build a new kernel for my Squeeze system*.
1 is incorrect: it dates to a month before 3.2, but was committed to net-next rather than Torvald's tree.
*I don't run straight Squeeze: I use an upstream LTS kernel, currently 3.4, plus several backports and built-from-git packages.
A CIA agent for sure. Linus should really investigate kernel contributors before letting them submit code, because who knows how many CIA agents and/or M$ employees are willing to introduce backdoors in Linux ?
Why don't you go then and carefully review each commit this CIA agent has submitted, there's bound to be more exploits if your hypothesis is true... really, you'd be doing us all a huge favour, we'd probably build you a statue or something.
Actually doing that is a rather interesting way to do a microkernel and there's this project http://www.mosa-project.org/ and Microsoft Midori doing a managed microkernel in C#. I'll definitely be interested to see if either of those actually goes anywhere.
So, they use shit to make even worse and slower shit than winblows is?
This news is really alarming since according to my understanding this spcific bug can only happen as a result of really sloppy coding practices or deliberate sabotage!?
Why has not Linux foundation put up some prize money for reported 0-day vulnerabilities? Would it be such a burden for such an organization to promise 10k$ for every submitted 0-day root exploit or something similar? 10k would be huge money for a security researcher but pocket change for Linux foundation. This would encourage the 0-day to be reported rather than sold for profit.
they should port the whole kernel to C#/.NET. There you got a nice garbage collector and don't have to worry about strange things like pointers and a buffer/memoryoverflow get's a nice exception.
ok, but seriously...someone should implement a background garbage collector and some meta-error handling in C and C++. That'd get rid of those 'security holes' instantely.
Sure, using some type of managed array in the case of this function would have prevented this *specific* security hole, but the performance hit of using only managed array within the kernel would have made it far from being acceptable and this is only one *specific* attack vector. (Let alone using fully managed programming language inside the kernel *).
Any one that ever written large chunks of kernel code knows that you do your best to verify user-supplied parameters, but being human, you will fuck up from time to time.
* ... In which case most attack vectors will simply target the managed language VM.