Bug 165528

Summary: bogus module_verify_elf check rejects valid .ko files
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Roland McGrath <roland>
Component: kernelAssignee: David Howells <dhowells>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Brian Brock <bbrock>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: davej, emmanuel.druon, fche, wtogami
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-08-15 21:13:59 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 165416    
Attachments:
Description Flags
fix for bogus elf layout assertion in module verification none

Description Roland McGrath 2005-08-10 07:55:25 UTC 
Description of problem:

A bug in one of the sanity checks on kernel module files done by the module
signature checking stuff causes it to reject valid .ko files that happen to have
their section headers at the end of the file.  It's pure luck that older tools
haven't produced files with this layout before, and it could bite on future
builds after binutils/elfutils updates.  This bug should be cloned to all the FC
and RHEL release streams that have the module signing code.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
  
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Fix attached.
Comment 1 Roland McGrath 2005-08-10 07:55:37 UTC 
Created attachment 117597 [details]
fix for bogus elf layout assertion in module verification
Comment 2 Frank Ch. Eigler 2005-08-11 17:08:21 UTC 
Would a workaround in elfutils (or whoever is creating these newfangled files)
be prudent in the mean time, to avoid triggering the bug?
Comment 3 Roland McGrath 2005-08-15 21:13:59 UTC 
Dave put the fix in.
Comment 4 Dave Jones 2005-08-31 23:12:27 UTC 
*** Bug 166828 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***