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: <20150923094358.GB8644@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 23 Sep 2015 11:43:58 +0200
From:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>
Cc:	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kyle Walker <kwalker@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stanislav Kozina <skozina@...hat.com>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: [patch] mm, oom: remove task_lock protecting comm printing

On Wed 23-09-15 12:30:22, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 06:13:54PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > On (09/23/15 11:06), Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 04:30:13PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> > > > The oom killer takes task_lock() in a couple of places solely to protect
> > > > printing the task's comm.
> > > > 
> > > > A process's comm, including current's comm, may change due to
> > > > /proc/pid/comm or PR_SET_NAME.
> > > > 
> > > > The comm will always be NULL-terminated, so the worst race scenario would
> > > > only be during update.  We can tolerate a comm being printed that is in
> > > > the middle of an update to avoid taking the lock.
> > > > 
> > > > Other locations in the kernel have already dropped task_lock() when
> > > > printing comm, so this is consistent.
> > > 
> > > Without the protection, can't reading task->comm race with PR_SET_NAME
> > > as described below?
> > 
> > the previous name was already null terminated,
> 
> Yeah, but if the old name is shorter than the new one, set_task_comm()
> overwrites the terminating null of the old name before writing the new
> terminating null, so there is a short time window during which tsk->comm
> might be not null-terminated, no?

Not really:
        case PR_SET_NAME:
                comm[sizeof(me->comm) - 1] = 0;
                if (strncpy_from_user(comm, (char __user *)arg2,
                                      sizeof(me->comm) - 1) < 0)
                        return -EFAULT;

So it first writes the terminating 0 and only then starts copying.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ