[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89i+_8QXCZfVPhCgKH5TNnKumhH=z5AAXepTfRDs1QwDDEA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 03:14:28 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: p.sawicki2@...tner.samsung.com
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
syzbot <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: make icmp6_send() robust against null skb->dev
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 3:08 AM Piotr Sawicki
<p.sawicki2@...tner.samsung.com> wrote:
> Yes I know. It looks like the Smack's security rule was changed during this process.
>
> Firstly the packet was allowed to be received and it was put into the backlog queue. Then, the
>
> rule was changed, and during the release phase LSM was called again for the same packet.
>
> But this time, Smack denied access and tried to send an ICMPv6 packet to inform a peer.
>
> I want to make sure if it is the root cause of this problem.
>
>
> Besides, what is the purpose of setting skb->dev to NULL in __sk_receive_skb() ?
We can not keep a pointer to the device, the device might be
dismantled/freed before socket backlog can be processed.
Input processing is using RCU, meaning no refcount is taken on the device.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists