linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the security tree with the mm tree

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: <20241120143011.100edd4d@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 14:30:11 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, Casey Schaufler
 <casey@...aufler-ca.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
 <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the security tree with the mm tree

Hi all,

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 14:46:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the security tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   kernel/auditsc.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   cd39427be833 ("auditsc: replace memcpy() with strscpy()")
> 
> from the mm-nonmm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commits:
> 
>   37f670aacd48 ("lsm: use lsm_prop in security_current_getsecid")
>   13d826e564e2 ("audit: change context data from secid to lsm_prop")
> 
> from the security tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
> 
> diff --cc kernel/auditsc.c
> index 7adc67d5aafb,f28fd513d047..000000000000
> --- a/kernel/auditsc.c
> +++ b/kernel/auditsc.c
> @@@ -2729,8 -2728,8 +2728,8 @@@ void __audit_ptrace(struct task_struct 
>   	context->target_auid = audit_get_loginuid(t);
>   	context->target_uid = task_uid(t);
>   	context->target_sessionid = audit_get_sessionid(t);
> - 	security_task_getsecid_obj(t, &context->target_sid);
> + 	security_task_getlsmprop_obj(t, &context->target_ref);
>  -	memcpy(context->target_comm, t->comm, TASK_COMM_LEN);
>  +	strscpy(context->target_comm, t->comm);
>   }
>   
>   /**
> @@@ -2756,8 -2755,8 +2755,8 @@@ int audit_signal_info_syscall(struct ta
>   		ctx->target_auid = audit_get_loginuid(t);
>   		ctx->target_uid = t_uid;
>   		ctx->target_sessionid = audit_get_sessionid(t);
> - 		security_task_getsecid_obj(t, &ctx->target_sid);
> + 		security_task_getlsmprop_obj(t, &ctx->target_ref);
>  -		memcpy(ctx->target_comm, t->comm, TASK_COMM_LEN);
>  +		strscpy(ctx->target_comm, t->comm);
>   		return 0;
>   	}
>   
> @@@ -2777,8 -2776,8 +2776,8 @@@
>   	axp->target_auid[axp->pid_count] = audit_get_loginuid(t);
>   	axp->target_uid[axp->pid_count] = t_uid;
>   	axp->target_sessionid[axp->pid_count] = audit_get_sessionid(t);
> - 	security_task_getsecid_obj(t, &axp->target_sid[axp->pid_count]);
> + 	security_task_getlsmprop_obj(t, &axp->target_ref[axp->pid_count]);
>  -	memcpy(axp->target_comm[axp->pid_count], t->comm, TASK_COMM_LEN);
>  +	strscpy(axp->target_comm[axp->pid_count], t->comm);
>   	axp->pid_count++;
>   
>   	return 0;

This is now a conflict between the mm-nonmm-stable tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped