[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLQxmTvpELQQNX7C4-N8c73p99uYkx5GHvnuOgMhMph0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 10:00:35 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: P J P <ppandit@...hat.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, halfdog <me@...fdog.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] exec: do not leave bprm->interp on stack
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 4:50 AM, P J P <ppandit@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Hello folks,
>
> +-- On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Kees Cook wrote --+
> | > Al, what's your take on the *rare* extra call to request_module?
> |
> | Without any other feedback, I'd like to use my minimal allocation
> | patch, since it fixes the problem and doesn't change any of the
> | semantics of how/when loading happens.
>
> I did apply and test this patch with kernel-3.5.3 on my machine. Now it
> seems to disclose dynamically allocated(kstrdup) bytes, instead of the call
> stack bytes. Recursions still dodge and exceed the limit of
> BINPRM_MAX_RECURSION(4).
>
> Please pardon my asking, but - how is this a fix?
Hrm? It should be showing only the live heap-allocated interp -- are
you seeing uninitialized contents?
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
--
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