netdev - Re: [RFC] debugfs: protect against rmmod while files are open

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

Date:   Fri, 09 Oct 2020 12:48:05 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     nstange@...e.de, ap420073@...il.com, David.Laight@...lab.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] debugfs: protect against rmmod while files are open

On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 12:41 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:

> If the fops doesn't have a release method, we don't even need
> to keep a reference to the real_fops, we can just fops_put()
> them already in debugfs remove, and a later full_proxy_release()
> won't call anything anyway - this just crashed/UAFed because it
> used real_fops, not because there was actually a (now invalid)
> release() method.

I actually implemented something a bit better than what I described - we
never need a reference to the real_fops for the release method alone,
and that means if the release method is in the kernel image, rather than
a module, it can still be called.

That together should reduce the ~117 places you changed in the large
patchset to around a handful.

johannes