linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Audit fixes for 3.19 #2

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 31 Dec 2014 13:23:14 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-audit@...hat.com,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Audit fixes for 3.19 #2

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> wrote:
>
> One audit patch to resolve a panic/oops when recording filenames in the audit
> log, see the mail archive link below.  The fix isn't as nice as I would like,
> as it involves an allocate/copy of the filename, but it solves the problem and
> the overhead should only affect users who have configured audit rules
> involving file names.

This fix looks wrong.

The kernel "getname()" function already has hacks explicitly for this
audit usage. Why aren't those hacks working? See the whole
"audit_getname()" and "audit_putname()" thing in fs/namei.c.

So why does audit now need to copy the name *again*, when the whole -
and only - point of the current fs/namei.c audit hackery is exactly so
that audit can control the lifetime of the pathnames?

Hmm? Alternatively, could we just remove the fs/namei.c hackery
entirely, and rely on audit always copying the filenames for its own
use?

                      Linus
--
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/