| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20080520182757.GB32643@halcrowt61p.austin.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 13:27:57 -0500 From: Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@...ibm.com> To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [Q] eCryptFS race window? On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 09:03:21PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > it seems there is a few potential race window in eCryptFS which I > was trying to fix but it requires more deeper eCrypFS knowledge that > have (at least only by understanding eCryptFS in big picture it is > possible to fix this problem by elegant path). So what is the > problem - the procedures > > ecryptfs_miscdev_poll > ecryptfs_miscdev_read > > does take ecryptfs_daemon_hash_mux mutex and then daemon->mux _but_ > releases them not in exactly backward order as it should. My patches > (not in mainline but you saw them) was screwed up 'cause > mutex_is_locked could release mutex acquired by another process and > that is wrong. But I've a hope that I'm simply *wrong* about this > possible races ;) Take a look please. I cannot find an execution path whereby one of the two must re-acquire ecryptfs_daemon_hash_mux in order to release daemon->mux, so I do not think we will ever have deadlock between those two functions. Mike -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists