linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] exec: Fix use after free of tracepoint trace_sched_process

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, 4 Feb 2014 12:18:53 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	David Smith <dsmith@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Igor Zhbanov <i.zhbanov@...sung.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] exec: Fix use after free of tracepoint trace_sched_process_exec

On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> This works, but is rather ugly.

Oh, please, that's a British-level understatement. It's like calling
WWII "a small bother".

That's too ugly to live.

> Looking for any other suggestions here.

Do we actually have to use "filename" at all?

We do have bprm->file, and we could get a path from that. It would be
more expensive, but for tracing execve that might be fine. Yes/no?

Or maybe we could just push the "putname(path)" into free_bprm() and
remove it from the callers. That's where we free bprm->interp anyway,
so it would kind of match.

          Linus
--
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/