linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH]:RESEND : Return proper error value on failure of dentry

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: <4A2393DE.10300@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 01 Jun 2009 10:39:58 +0200
From:	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
To:	vibi_sreenivasan@....com
CC:	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>, Kylene Hall <kylene@...ibm.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>,
	Reiner Sailer <sailer@...son.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]:RESEND : Return proper error value on failure of dentry_open

On 06/01/2009 10:27 AM, vibi sreenivasan wrote:
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> @@ -201,10 +201,10 @@ int ima_path_check(struct path *path, int mask)
>  	}
>  out:
>  	mutex_unlock(&iint->mutex);
> -	if (file)
> +	if (!IS_ERR(file))
>  		fput(file);

No, IS_ERR won't catch NULL and there is 'file = NULL' on the
dentry_open fail path. I still think 'if (file)' is proper condition.

What bug did you hit?
--
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/