linux-kernel - Re: BUG? "Call fasync() functions without the BKL" is racy

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]

Message-ID: <4936F83E.7090506@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:21:02 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Vitaly Mayatskikh <vmayatsk@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG? "Call fasync() functions without the BKL" is racy


>> I wonder if we need FASYNC at all. This could be gotten implicitely by
>> looking at the fasync_list
> 
> Only if socket.

But the helpers used by the character drivers add it too I think.

> Serioulsy, I think the best (partial, yes) fix for now is to restore
> lock_kernel() in setfl() and change ioctl_fioxxx() accordingly.
> At least this protect us from tty too.

For 2.6.28 I agree.

> Not that I think this is very good idea though ;)

The lock bit sounds reasonable.

-Andi


--
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/