linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] filp->f_pos not correctly updated in proc_task

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 17 Mar 2009 00:27:20 +0800
From:	Zhang Le <r0bertz@...too.org>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...l.org, alan@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] filp->f_pos not correctly updated in proc_task_readdir

On 08:34 Mon 16 Mar     , Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 02:44:31PM +0800, Zhang Le wrote:
> > filp->f_pos only get updated at the end of the function. Thus d_off of those
> > dirents who are in the middle will be 0, and this will cause a problem in
> > glibc's readdir implementation, specifically endless loop. Because when overflow
> > occurs, f_pos will be set to next dirent to read, however it will be 0, unless
> > the next one is the last one. So it will start over again and again.
> 
> Eh...  Here's what's really going on:
> 
> proc_..._fill_cache() API is rather kludgy and far too convoluted.  In
> particular, it calls filldir() and passes file->f_pos to it, expecting
> the caller to update file->f_pos between the calls.  proc_task_readdir()
> uses that sucker, but doesn't update ->f_pos until the very end.  As
> the result, d_off of direntries produced by it gets screwed.
> Broken-by: commit 61a28784028e6d55755e4d0f39bee8d9bf2ee8d9
> Author: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
> Date:   Mon Oct 2 02:18:49 2006 -0700
> 
>     [PATCH] proc: Remove the hard coded inode numbers
> 

Thanks for sharing the insights.

> Patch is fine, but I'd rather rip the layers of ..._fill_cache() abstractions
> out and see what falls out.  Anyway, for -rc your variant is definitely the
> way to go.

So, will you take care of it? Or who else should I ask? Thanks in advance!

Zhang, Le
http://zhangle.is-a-geek.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/