linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1 linux-next] ipc/msg.c: fix memory leak in do

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <420188776.164680.1470051938683.open-xchange@webmail.nmp.proximus.be>
Date:	Mon, 1 Aug 2016 13:45:38 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>
To:	Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>,
	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1 linux-next] ipc/msg.c: fix memory leak in
 do_msgsnd()



> On 31 July 2016 at 16:36 Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Fabian,
>
> On 07/29/2016 10:15 AM, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> > Running LTP msgsnd06 with kmemleak gives the following:
> >
> > cat /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
> >
> > unreferenced object 0xffff88003c0a11f8 (size 8):
> >    comm "msgsnd06", pid 1645, jiffies 4294672526 (age 6.549s)
> >    hex dump (first 8 bytes):
> >      1b 00 00 00 01 00 00 00                          ........
> >    backtrace:
> >      [] kmemleak_alloc+0x23/0x40
> >      [] kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0xe1/0x180
> >      [] selinux_msg_queue_alloc_security+0x3f/0xd0
> >      [] security_msg_queue_alloc+0x2e/0x40
> >      [] newque+0x4e/0x150
> >      [] ipcget+0x159/0x1b0
> >      [] SyS_msgget+0x39/0x40
> >      [] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x13/0x8f
> >      [] 0xffffffffffffffff
> >
> > ipc_rcu_free() was given to ipc_rcu_putref() instead of msg_rcu_free()
> > which does security cleaning.
> Good catch!
>
>  From a quick look:
> - The same bug appears to exist in sem.c. Do you want to fix it as well?
> - Did you check when it was introduced? I would add cc stable.

Hi Manfred,

Thanks for your advices. I hope the second version is ok. I'll have a look at
sem.c to do the same.

Regards,
Fabian

>
> --
>      Manfred
>