linux-kernel - Re: Bisected regression: iterate_fd() selinux change affects flash plugin

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: <20121130034034.GB4939@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Fri, 30 Nov 2012 03:40:34 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>
Cc:	Pavel Roskin <proski@....org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	SE-Linux <selinux@...ho.nsa.gov>
Subject: Re: Bisected regression: iterate_fd() selinux change affects flash
 plugin

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:58:46PM -0500, Eric Paris wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Pavel Roskin <proski@....org> wrote:
> > Quoting Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>:
> >
> >> OMG this +1 -1 stuff is nuts...
> 
> Ping, Al.
> 
> int iterate_fd(struct files_struct *files, unsigned n,
> [snip]
>         while (!res && n < fdt->max_fds) {
>                 file = rcu_dereference_check_fdtable(files, fdt->fd[n++]);
>                 if (file)
>                         res = f(p, file, n);
>         }
>         spin_unlock(&files->file_lock);
>         return res;
> 
> So we increment n (the file descriptor number) in the dereference,
> then pass that (wrong) number to f().
> 
> Every single f() (including SELinux, the cause of this bug) returns
> fd+1 (so now we are up by 2).  Then all of the users of iterate fd
> actually use fd-1 (which is wrong)
> 
> Why not have iterate_fd return -ENOENT on no entries and stop all of
> the stupid games?  We fix the real bug (the above function should do
> the n++ after the f() call, and the interface is sane to design
> against...

Because we might bloody well want to have "run some test on all opened
files, return the first error".  And -ENOENT is quite possible one.
Moreover, -ENOENT for "everything's OK, keep going" would be really
weird.

The bug is real, but Pavel's patch is all wrong.  The problem is in the
argument; we should pass descriptor number, not descriptor + 1.  And fixing
that (in iterator_fd() itself) makes all callbacks work as they ought to.

PS: Pavel, the life is painful enough as it is, no need to involve BZ into
it.  Next time you need to post a patch, please do just that, especially
when it's so short, OK?
--
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/