[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEfhGizesRT9YOfKs09mbnA+PKnG5i2ERmPNyx_+Z6LZ1_bcFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2017 14:25:15 -0400
From: Craig Gallek <kraigatgoog@...il.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Leak in ipv6_gso_segment()?
On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 2:05 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
> Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 13:26:02 +0100
>
>> If I'm not mistaken, ipv6_gso_segment() now leaks segs if
>> ip6_find_1stfragopt() fails. I'm not sure whether the fix would be as
>> simple as adding a kfree_skb(segs) or whether more complex cleanup is
>> needed.
>
> I think we need to use kfree_skb_list(), like the following.
I think this is problematic as well. ipv6_gso_segment could
previously return errors, in which case the caller uses kfree_skb (ex
validate_xmit_skb() -> skb_gso_segment -> ...
callbacks.gso_segment()). Having the kfree_skb_list here would cause
a double free if I'm reading this correctly.
My first guess was going to be skb_gso_error_unwind(), but I'm still
trying to understand that code...
Sorry again for the fallout from this bug fix. This is my first time
down this code path and I clearly didn't understand it fully :/
> Can someone please audit and review this for me? We need to
> get this to -stable.
>
> Thanks.
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv6/ip6_offload.c b/net/ipv6/ip6_offload.c
> index 280268f..cdb3728 100644
> --- a/net/ipv6/ip6_offload.c
> +++ b/net/ipv6/ip6_offload.c
> @@ -116,8 +116,10 @@ static struct sk_buff *ipv6_gso_segment(struct sk_buff *skb,
>
> if (udpfrag) {
> int err = ip6_find_1stfragopt(skb, &prevhdr);
> - if (err < 0)
> + if (err < 0) {
> + kfree_skb_list(segs);
> return ERR_PTR(err);
> + }
> fptr = (struct frag_hdr *)((u8 *)ipv6h + err);
> fptr->frag_off = htons(offset);
> if (skb->next)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists