[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131214163317.GB21675@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 17:33:17 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc: Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
Evan McNabb <emcnabb@...hat.com>,
Jan Stancek <jstancek@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] selinux: selinux_setprocattr()->ptrace_parent() needs
rcu_read_lock()
selinux_setprocattr() does ptrace_parent(p) under task_lock(p),
but task_struct->alloc_lock doesn't pin ->parent or ->ptrace,
this looks confusing and triggers the "suspicious RCU usage"
warning because ptrace_parent() does rcu_dereference_check().
And in theory this is wrong, spin_lock()->preempt_disable()
doesn't necessarily imply rcu_read_lock() we need to access
the ->parent.
Reported-by: Evan McNabb <emcnabb@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
---
security/selinux/hooks.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
+++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
@@ -5503,11 +5503,11 @@ static int selinux_setprocattr(struct ta
/* Check for ptracing, and update the task SID if ok.
Otherwise, leave SID unchanged and fail. */
ptsid = 0;
- task_lock(p);
+ rcu_read_lock();
tracer = ptrace_parent(p);
if (tracer)
ptsid = task_sid(tracer);
- task_unlock(p);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
if (tracer) {
error = avc_has_perm(ptsid, sid, SECCLASS_PROCESS,
--
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