I don't get why this is noteworthy? It's literally a piece of code in a Rust "unsafe" block. If you put something in an "unsafe" block the compiler isn't going to help you, you are on your own. That's why it's called "unsafe".
Now what is kinda interesting is that instead of getting rid of the "unsafe" block the developers put in some extra check. I guess you can take the developer out of C but you can't take the C out of the developer?
> Now what is kinda interesting is that instead of getting rid of the "unsafe" block the developers put in some extra check. I guess you can take the developer out of C but you can't take the C out of the developer?
The patch devs said that they're interested in larger-scale changes to get rid of the need for `unsafe` in this kind of situation, but since that'll take time it's more important to just fix the bug for now.
The mistake there is a classical example of why (software) transactional memory is valuable. Double linked lists are trivial in single core execution, need PhD level understanding of everything in multicore execution and become trivial again in multicore execution with (S)TM.
Rust has troubles with STM because it lacks anything resembling effect system. Most probably, this will not be fixed.
I hate this bot-detection anime girl popping up on my monitor while I pretend to be working. Same goes for the funny pictures at the beginning of some Github readmes. Sorry for complaining about a tangential annoyance, but I haven't seen this particular sentiment expressed yet.
Technically, binder is still part of Linux, even if it's not enabled by default in many cases.
This "security vulnerability" is just a local DoS though. Annoying and problematic as it effectively bypasses controls over power on/off behaviour, but as far as I can tell from this report, no memory is leaked and no code execution can be achieved.
It's UB, it is not memory safe, so in theory, and often also in practice with this specific kind of bug, absolutely anything could happen, including code execution.
Greg Kroah-Hartman's comment is both wrong and perplexing.
I don't get why this is noteworthy? It's literally a piece of code in a Rust "unsafe" block. If you put something in an "unsafe" block the compiler isn't going to help you, you are on your own. That's why it's called "unsafe".
Now what is kinda interesting is that instead of getting rid of the "unsafe" block the developers put in some extra check. I guess you can take the developer out of C but you can't take the C out of the developer?
> Now what is kinda interesting is that instead of getting rid of the "unsafe" block the developers put in some extra check. I guess you can take the developer out of C but you can't take the C out of the developer?
The patch devs said that they're interested in larger-scale changes to get rid of the need for `unsafe` in this kind of situation, but since that'll take time it's more important to just fix the bug for now.
[0]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251111-binder-fix-list-remove-...
Effectively a dupe of this thread from ~14 hours ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46302621 (130 comments as of this comment)
The mistake there is a classical example of why (software) transactional memory is valuable. Double linked lists are trivial in single core execution, need PhD level understanding of everything in multicore execution and become trivial again in multicore execution with (S)TM.
Rust has troubles with STM because it lacks anything resembling effect system. Most probably, this will not be fixed.
may you share links to read or vote to understand better and push for?
The URL this points to does not say anything about security. There's an example of a race condition causing memory corruption and a crash.
While it doesn't add much more info: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2025121614-CVE-20...
I hate this bot-detection anime girl popping up on my monitor while I pretend to be working. Same goes for the funny pictures at the beginning of some Github readmes. Sorry for complaining about a tangential annoyance, but I haven't seen this particular sentiment expressed yet.
I use a uBlock Origin filter to block the anime girl from loading:
Normally I don't mind, but on this page it took at least 15 seconds for me.
It is expressed very often.
I had an idea!
Instead of using this to do some proof of work, why not just get the bot detector to mine bitcoin or something...
I mean it is just as useless... And at least the website gets some money back from the raw extraction of data now happening...
Edit: speeeeeling
this was the plan, this was the plan. just wait little bit it get spread more.
Also this is a joke
Within the Android drivers, right?
Technically, binder is still part of Linux, even if it's not enabled by default in many cases.
This "security vulnerability" is just a local DoS though. Annoying and problematic as it effectively bypasses controls over power on/off behaviour, but as far as I can tell from this report, no memory is leaked and no code execution can be achieved.
It's UB, it is not memory safe, so in theory, and often also in practice with this specific kind of bug, absolutely anything could happen, including code execution.
Greg Kroah-Hartman's comment is both wrong and perplexing.
yes