[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200608130503.GA22898@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 15:05:03 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, Andrey Ignatov <rdna@...com>
Subject: Re: WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 52 at mm/page_alloc.c:4826
__alloc_pages_nodemask (Re: [PATCH 5/5] sysctl: pass kernel
pointers to ->proc_handler)
On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 09:45:49AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> Just a test case.
>
> Allowing the kernel to allocate an unbounded amount of memory on behalf
> of userspace is an easy DOS.
>
> All the length checks were already in there, e.g.
>
> static int cmm_timeout_handler(struct ctl_table *ctl, int write,
> void __user *buffer, size_t *lenp, loff_t
> *ppos)
> {
> char buf[64], *p;
> [...]
> len = min(*lenp, sizeof(buf));
> if (copy_from_user(buf, buffer, len))
> return -EFAULT;
Doesn't help if we don't know the exact limit yet. But we can put
some arbitrary but reasonable limit like KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE on the
sysctls and see if this sticks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists