linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net v2] net: sched: act_ct: fix possible refcount leak in tcf_ct

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: <YzibOQ2dviUNneAY@pop-os.localdomain>
Date:   Sat, 1 Oct 2022 12:55:37 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     Hangyu Hua <hbh25y@...il.com>
Cc:     jhs@...atatu.com, jiri@...nulli.us, davem@...emloft.net,
        edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
        paulb@...lanox.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: sched: act_ct: fix possible refcount leak in
 tcf_ct_init()

On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 10:00:46AM +0800, Hangyu Hua wrote:
> nf_ct_put need to be called to put the refcount got by tcf_ct_fill_params
> to avoid possible refcount leak when tcf_ct_flow_table_get fails.
> 
> Fixes: c34b961a2492 ("net/sched: act_ct: Create nf flow table per zone")
> Signed-off-by: Hangyu Hua <hbh25y@...il.com>
> ---
> 
> v2: use a new label to put the refcount.
> 
>  net/sched/act_ct.c | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/sched/act_ct.c b/net/sched/act_ct.c
> index d55afb8d14be..5950974ae8f6 100644
> --- a/net/sched/act_ct.c
> +++ b/net/sched/act_ct.c
> @@ -1394,7 +1394,7 @@ static int tcf_ct_init(struct net *net, struct nlattr *nla,
>  
>  	err = tcf_ct_flow_table_get(net, params);
>  	if (err)
> -		goto cleanup;
> +		goto cleanup_params;
>  
>  	spin_lock_bh(&c->tcf_lock);
>  	goto_ch = tcf_action_set_ctrlact(*a, parm->action, goto_ch);
> @@ -1409,6 +1409,9 @@ static int tcf_ct_init(struct net *net, struct nlattr *nla,
>  
>  	return res;
>  
> +cleanup_params:
> +	if (params->tmpl)
> +		nf_ct_put(params->tmpl);

Nit: this NULL check is unnecessary.

Thanks.