linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] af_unix: If we don't care about credentials coallesce all messages

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: <874nfmeg53.fsf@xmission.com>
Date:	Thu, 04 Apr 2013 03:36:56 -0700
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	dingtianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Sven Joachim <svenjoac@....de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Karel Srot <ksrot@...hat.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] af_unix: If we don't care about credentials coallesce all messages

dingtianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com> writes:

> On 2013/4/4 10:14, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> 
>> It was reported that the following LSB test case failed
>> https://lsbbugs.linuxfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=2144 because we
>> were not coallescing unix stream messages when the application was
>> expecting us to.
>> 
>> The problem was that the first send was before the socket was accepted
>> and thus sock->sk_socket was NULL in maybe_add_creds, and the second
>> send after the socket was accepted had a non-NULL value for sk->socket
>> and thus we could tell the credentials were not needed so we did not
>> bother.
>> 
>> The unnecessary credentials on the first message cause
>> unix_stream_recvmsg to start verifying that all messages had the same
>> credentials before coallescing and then the coallescing failed because
>> the second message had no credentials.
>> 
>> Ignoring credentials when we don't care in unix_stream_recvmsg fixes a
>> long standing pessimization which would fail to coallesce messages when
>> reading from a unix stream socket if the senders were different even if
>> we did not care about their credentials.
>> 
>> I have tested this and verified that the in the LSB test case mentioned
>> above that the messages do coallesce now, while the were failing to
>> coallesce without this change.
>> 
>> Reported-by: Karel Srot <ksrot@...hat.com>
>> Reported-by: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
>> ---
>>  net/unix/af_unix.c |    2 +-
>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/net/unix/af_unix.c b/net/unix/af_unix.c
>> index f153a8d..2db702d 100644
>> --- a/net/unix/af_unix.c
>> +++ b/net/unix/af_unix.c
>> @@ -1993,7 +1993,7 @@ again:
>>  			if ((UNIXCB(skb).pid  != siocb->scm->pid) ||
>>  			    (UNIXCB(skb).cred != siocb->scm->cred))
>>  				break;
>> -		} else {
>> +		} else if (test_bit(SOCK_PASSCRED, &sock->flags)) {
>>  			/* Copy credentials */
>>  			scm_set_cred(siocb->scm, UNIXCB(skb).pid, UNIXCB(skb).cred);
>>  			check_creds = 1;
>> 
>
> As your opinion, I think the way is better:
>
> 		if (test_bit(SOCK_PASSCRED, &sock->flags)) {
>                         if (check_creds) {
>                                 /* Never glue messages from different writers */
>                                 if ((UNIXCB(skb).pid  != siocb->scm->pid) ||
>                                 (UNIXCB(skb).cred != siocb->scm->cred))
>                                         break;
>                         } else {
>                                 /* Copy credentials */
>                                 scm_set_cred(siocb->scm, UNIXCB(skb).pid, UNIXCB(skb).cred);
>                                 check_creds = 1;
>                         }
>                 }

It is a smidge clearer in intent, but there is no functional
difference.  The lines get really long.

Shrug.

Patches are always welcome.

Beyond getting something correct for the right reasons I don't care.

Eric

--
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/