linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper

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: <20130915163157.GB13344@redhat.com>
Date:	Sun, 15 Sep 2013 18:31:57 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc:	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, rostedt@...dmis.org, fweisbec@...il.com,
	mingo@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec().

ACK, but...

On 09/15, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>
> @@ -572,6 +572,10 @@ int call_usermodehelper_exec(struct subprocess_info *sub_info, int wait)
>  	int retval = 0;
>  
>  	helper_lock();
> +	if (!sub_info->path) {
> +		retval = -ENOENT;
> +		goto out;
> +	}

May I suggest you to send v2?

It looks a bit ugly to check ->path under helper_lock(), just add

	if (!sub_info->path)
		retval = -ENOENT;

at the start. Otherwise the code looks as if there is a subtle
reason to take the lock before this check.


Perhaps you can also mention that this problems was fixed by
264b83c07a and right after that 7f57cfa4e2 reintroduced it,
because I am stupid.

Oleg.

--
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/