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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:11:05 -0500 From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> To: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com> Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "cgroups@...r.kernel.org" <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-audit@...hat.com" <linux-audit@...hat.com>, "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>, "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "hannes@...xchg.org" <hannes@...xchg.org>, "lizefan@...wei.com" <lizefan@...wei.com>, "acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>, "alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com" <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "luto@...nel.org" <luto@...nel.org>, Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/19] kernel: convert audit_tree.count from atomic_t to refcount_t On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Reshetova, Elena <elena.reshetova@...el.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 5:19 AM, Elena Reshetova >> <elena.reshetova@...el.com> wrote: >> > refcount_t type and corresponding API should be >> > used instead of atomic_t when the variable is used as >> > a reference counter. This allows to avoid accidental >> > refcounter overflows that might lead to use-after-free >> > situations. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com> >> > Signed-off-by: Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com> >> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> >> > Signed-off-by: David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com> >> > --- >> > kernel/audit_tree.c | 8 ++++---- >> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> No objection on my end, same for patch 16/19. >> >> I have no problem merging both these patches into the audit/next >> branch after the merge window, is that your goal or are you merging >> these via a different tree? > > Thank you Paul! I think it is better if they go through the trees they supposed to go through > since this way they would get more testing and etc. So, please take the relevant ones to your tree when the time is right. > > After the first round, I guess we will see what patches are not propagating and then maybe take them via Kees tree. I just realized that include/linux/refcount.h didn't make it into v4.10 which means there is going to be delay until I merge them into the audit tree (I don't base the tree on -rc releases except under extreme circumstances). I've got the patches queued up in a private holding branch (I added #includes BTW) so I won't forget, but as a FYI, they likely won't make it in until v4.12. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists