linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] unix: avoid use-after-free in ep_remove_wait

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]

Message-ID: <87h9kh7dpe.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Nov 2015 23:48:45 +0000
From:	Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@...ileactivedefense.com>
To:	Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@...ileactivedefense.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jbaron@...mai.com,
	dvyukov@...gle.com, syzkaller@...glegroups.com, mkubecek@...e.cz,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hannes@...essinduktion.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com, paul@...l-moore.com, salyzyn@...roid.com,
	sds@...ho.nsa.gov, ying.xue@...driver.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	kcc@...gle.com, glider@...gle.com, andreyknvl@...gle.com,
	sasha.levin@...cle.com, jln@...gle.com, keescook@...gle.com,
	minipli@...glemail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] unix: avoid use-after-free in ep_remove_wait_queue (w/ Fixes:)

Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@...ileactivedefense.com> writes:
> Rainer Weikusat <rw@...pelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> The basic options would be
>>
>> 	- return EAGAIN even if sending became possible (Jason's most
>>           recent suggestions)
>>
>> 	- retry sending a limited number of times, eg, once, before
>>           returning EAGAIN, on the grounds that this is nicer to the
>>           application and that redoing all the stuff up to the _lock in
>>           dgram_sendmsg can possibly/ likely be avoided
>
> A third option:

A fourth and even one that's reasonably simple to implement: In case
other became ready during the checks, drop other lock, do a double-lock
sk, other, set a flag variable indicating this and restart the procedure
after the unix_state_lock_other[*], using the value of the flag to lock/
unlock sk as needed. Should other still be ready to receive data,
execution can then continue with the 'queue it' code as the other lock
was held all the time this time. Combined with a few unlikely
annotations in place where they're IMHO appropriate, this is speed-wise
comparable to the stock kernel.
--
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/