[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM_iQpUDhakMjof97qWvyLFXiDMiL6FUv+5OzGTPbnCXZp=Pzw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:27:15 -0800
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Anoob Soman <anoob.soman@...rix.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, jarno@....org,
Philip Pettersson <philip.pettersson@...il.com>,
weongyo.linux@...il.com, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: net/packet: use-after-free in packet_rcv_fanout
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 7:17 AM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Another similar one:
>
The other possibility is: __fanout_link() is called twice on the same
packet sock
for some reason, but __fanout_unlink() only unlinks the first one, which led to
this use-after-free. However, the po->running and po->fanout seem enough
to guarantee this should not happen. I still want to point this out in case I
miss anything here so that other people could figure it out.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists