linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3.12 32/64] unix: properly account for FDs passed over unix sockets

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:	Fri, 12 Feb 2016 08:57:31 +0100
From:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc:	stable@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.12 32/64] unix: properly account for FDs passed over
 unix sockets

On 02/11/2016, 06:32 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Jiri,
> 
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 02:59:08PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>> From: willy tarreau <w@....eu>
>>
>> 3.12-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>>
>> ===============
>>
>> [ Upstream commit 712f4aad406bb1ed67f3f98d04c044191f0ff593 ]
>>
>> It is possible for a process to allocate and accumulate far more FDs than
>> the process' limit by sending them over a unix socket then closing them
>> to keep the process' fd count low.
>>
>> This change addresses this problem by keeping track of the number of FDs
>> in flight per user and preventing non-privileged processes from having
>> more FDs in flight than their configured FD limit.
>>
>> Reported-by: socketpair@...il.com
>> Reported-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
>> Mitigates: CVE-2013-4312 (Linux 2.0+)
>> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
>> Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
>> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
> 
> A possible issue was reported regarding this patch, and Hannes
> implemented a fix that's not yet in mainline. I guess it's
> preferable to postpone this patch for now.

Hi,

yes definitely. Thanks for noting.

For reference:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/2142236

thanks,
-- 
js
suse labs