netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v1] tun: Cleanup error handling in tun_set

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20090806.204032.39020854.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 06 Aug 2009 20:40:32 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:	ebiederm@...ssion.com, paul.moore@...com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1] tun: Cleanup error handling in tun_set_iff()

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 10:22:44 +1000

> tun: Extend RTNL lock coverage over whole ioctl
> 
> As it is, parts of the ioctl runs under the RTNL and parts of
> it do not.  The unlocked section is still protected by the BKL,
> but there can be subtle races.  For example, Eric Biederman and
> Paul Moore observed that if two threads tried to create two tun
> devices on the same file descriptor, then unexpected results
> may occur.
> 
> As there isn't anything in the ioctl that is expected to sleep
> indefinitely, we can prevent this from occurring by extending
> the RTNL lock coverage.
> 
> This also allows to get rid of the BKL.
> 
> Finally, I changed tun_get_iff to take a tun device in order to
> avoid calling tun_put which would dead-lockt as it also tries to
> take the RTNL lock.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>

This looks good after a quick audit, Eric what say you?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html