linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH resend] audit: fix mark refcounting

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:	Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:01:51 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] audit: fix mark refcounting

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 09:56:26AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:

> > Guys, does anybody have a real demonstration of the breakage cured by
> > pinning the mark down in audit_watch.c ->handle_event()?  Or is that
> > a pure theory?
> 
> Yes it does fix the BUG.  Test case in patch.
> 
> > Is ->handle_event() argument held by caller?
> 
> Well, obviously not, otherwise we wouldn't hit the bug.
> 
> >   Eric?  If that's the case,
> > we don't need to do anything with audit_watch.c instance; otherwise,
> > both that one and inotify_handle_event() are in trouble...
> 
> Yep.

I wonder if the right fix is to do it here and not in caller, though...
OTOH, usually we don't hit destroy at all, so it's probably better to
handle it in the individual instances...

OK, consider the audit_watch.c part ACKed; inotify counterpart needs a similar
patch, AFAICS.
--
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/