[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 13:10:25 -0800
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...roid.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: CVE-2016-7097 causes acl leak
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:46 AM, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:
> So I agree with you the mentioned commit didn't change anything. I took
> care to keep the previous behavior wrt NULLing the acl pointer (obviously I
> could have made mistake somewhere but I don't see where). However your
> patch is definitely wrong. See e.g. fs/ext2/acl.c: ext2_set_acl() - there we
> really want to just clear the pointer. We release the ACL in the caller of
> ext2_set_acl().
>
Hmm, that is very subtle, are you saying we don't carry the change out of
set_posix_acl() because we modify its argument on stack? This is clearly
an anti-pattern in kernel code base.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists