| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <541DD3C5.9000904@yandex.ru> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2014 23:21:41 +0400 From: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@...dex.ru> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...allels.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] sched: Use rq->rd in sched_setaffinity() under RCU read lock On 20.09.2014 23:18, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 11:05:46PM +0400, Kirill Tkhai wrote: >> On 20.09.2014 22:59, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 08:51:40PM +0400, Kirill Tkhai wrote: >>>> From: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...allels.com> >>>> >>>> task_rq(p)->rd and task_rq(p)->rd->span may be used-after-free here. >>>> Probability of NULL pointer derefference isn't zero in this place. >>> >>> I don't see NULL derefs, just use-after-free. >>> >> >> It's very paranod case :). Two pointers are here: >> >> task_rq(p)->rd (somebody zeroed it "rd") ->span > > What you're saying is: due to the reuse someone might have put a NULL > in there. Which is fair, but I'd still call it use-after-free because > that is the first order problem. Dereferencing 'unknown' memory can of > course cause all kinds of 'fun' problems :-) Yeah, it's logical, I'll update the description. -- 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