linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Release fp pointer when leaving from seccomp_attach

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: <CAGXu5jJSnTB1ifPmgW5VwSrVU4yqgg2SEpxAEi=0Afpy_mc0yg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:08:15 -0700
From:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
Cc:	Masami Ichikawa <masami256@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
	Rashika Kheria <rashika.kheria@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Release fp pointer when leaving from seccomp_attach_filter().

On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Masami Ichikawa <masami256@...il.com> wrote:
>> kmemleak reported some memory leak as below.
>
> grrr. yes. sorry.
>
>> unreferenced object 0xffff8800d6ea4000 (size 512):
>>   comm "sshd", pid 278, jiffies 4294898315 (age 46.653s)
>>   hex dump (first 32 bytes):
>>     21 00 00 00 04 00 00 00 15 00 01 00 3e 00 00 c0  !...........>...
>>     06 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ........!.......
>>   backtrace:
>>     [<ffffffff8151414e>] kmemleak_alloc+0x4e/0xb0
>>     [<ffffffff811a3a40>] __kmalloc+0x280/0x320
>>     [<ffffffff8110842e>] prctl_set_seccomp+0x11e/0x3b0
>>     [<ffffffff8107bb6b>] SyS_prctl+0x3bb/0x4a0
>>     [<ffffffff8152ef2d>] system_call_fastpath+0x1a/0x1f
>>     [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
>>
>> This memory leak happend in seccomp_attach_filter().
>> The fp pointer was allocated via kzalloc so that it needs to realase memory
>> when leaving from function.

Thanks for the catch!

>> This patch changed two things.
>> One is set -ENOMEM to ret, if fp is unable to get memory.
>> The other is removes "return 0" statement, and frees fp pointer before
>> leaving.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Masami Ichikawa <masami256@...il.com>
>> ---
>>  kernel/seccomp.c | 8 +++++---
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c
>> index d8d046c..a9ce7a9 100644
>> --- a/kernel/seccomp.c
>> +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c
>> @@ -259,8 +259,10 @@ static long seccomp_attach_filter(struct sock_fprog *fprog)
>>         filter = kzalloc(sizeof(struct seccomp_filter) +
>>                          sizeof(struct sock_filter_int) * new_len,
>>                          GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_NOWARN);
>> -       if (!filter)
>> +       if (!filter) {
>> +               ret = -ENOMEM;
>>                 goto free_prog;
>> +       }
>
> agree. that's a good addition.
>
>>         ret = sk_convert_filter(fp, fprog->len, filter->insnsi, &new_len);
>>         if (ret)
>> @@ -275,10 +277,10 @@ static long seccomp_attach_filter(struct sock_fprog *fprog)
>>          */
>>         filter->prev = current->seccomp.filter;
>>         current->seccomp.filter = filter;
>> -       return 0;
>
> I think mixing error and ok return paths is ugly.
> Can you add kfree(fp) here instead of removing return 0?
>
> Thanks!
>
>>  free_filter:
>> -       kfree(filter);
>> +       if (ret)
>> +               kfree(filter);
>>  free_prog:
>>         kfree(fp);
>>         return ret;
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>

Yeah, I'd prefer a different approach that follows the existing
conventions in the code. I'll send a separate patch.

-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/