linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix some kallsyms

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070315182653.GA5333@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru>
Date:	Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:26:53 +0300
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	Paulo Marques <pmarques@...popie.com>
Cc:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...ru>, akpm@...l.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...nvz.org, mingo@...e.hu,
	tglx@...utronix.de, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, rusty@...tcorp.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix some kallsyms_lookup() vs rmmod races

On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 04:53:59PM +0000, Paulo Marques wrote:
> Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> >[cc'ing folks whose proc files are affected]
> >
> >kallsyms_lookup() can call module_address_lookup() which iterates over
> >modules list without module_mutex taken. Comment at the top of
> >module_address_lookup() says it's for oops resolution so races are
> >irrelevant, but in some cases it's reachable from regular code:
>
> So maybe we should just add a new parameter to "kallsyms_lookup" to
> inform it if it is safe to take a mutex or not.

You have to drag "mod->name" out of kallsyms_lookup(), so if you drop
module_mutex in it, you still have a bug.

We can agree on kallsyms_lookup() or whatever other low-level function
to copy everything into caller-supplied structure and not spreading
module_mutex. module's name is 64 minus a little, so stack usage should
be fine.

> Spreading module_mutex everywhere doesn't seem like the right interface
> for several reasons:
>
>  - new users of "kallsyms_lookup" might not be aware that they should
> take module_mutex if it is safe

Well, yes.

>  - many times we will be taking module_mutex even when we are fetching
> a kernel symbol that shouldn't require the mutex at all
>
>  - it just creates new dependencies (hint: this patch shouldn't even
> compile with current git since module_mutex is not declared in module.h,

Yeah, I remembered about it only in subway :).

This patch is techically dependent on http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/14/128 aka
[PATCH v2] Race between cat /proc/kallsyms and rmmod

> not to mention compile when CONFIG_MODULES not set)

OK, I'll fix it.

> IMHO we should not expose module_mutex outside of module.c. That is just
> wrong from an encapsulation point of view.

-
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/