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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 1 Dec 2022 14:20:09 +0800
From:   Baokun Li <>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <>
CC:     Luís Henriques <>,
        Andreas Dilger <>,
        <>, <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ext4: fix a NULL pointer when validating an inode

On 2022/12/1 12:32, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 11:20:11AM +0800, Baokun Li wrote:
>>> If we can protect against the problem by adding a check that has other
>>> value as well (such as making usre that when ext4_iget fetches a
>>> special inode, we enforce that i_links_couint must be > 0), maybe
>>> that's worth it.
>> Yes, but some special inodes allow i_links_couint to be zero,
>> such as the uninitialized boot load inode.
> That's a good point; but the only time when a special inode can
> validly have a zero i_links_count is when it has no blocks associated
> to it.  Otherwise, when the file system releases the inode using
> iput() when the file system is unmounted, all of the blocks will get
> released when the inode is evicted.  So we can have ext4_iget() allow
> fetching an inode if i_blocks[] is zeros.  But if it has any blocks
> and i_links_count is non-zero, something must be terribly wrong with
> that inode.
> Cheers,
> 					- Ted
Totally agree! That sounds good!

With Best Regards,
Baokun Li

Powered by blists - more mailing lists