netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: dsa: avoid potential use-after-free error

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, 20 Nov 2020 13:17:00 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     Christian Eggers <ceggers@...i.de>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: dsa: avoid potential use-after-free
 error

On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 23:04:36 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 12:59:21PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 20:01:49 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:  
> > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 12:09:06PM +0100, Christian Eggers wrote:  
> > > > If dsa_switch_ops::port_txtstamp() returns false, clone will be freed
> > > > immediately. Shouldn't store a pointer to freed memory.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Eggers <ceggers@...i.de>
> > > > Fixes: 146d442c2357 ("net: dsa: Keep a pointer to the skb clone for TX timestamping")
> > > > ---  
> > >
> > > IMO this is one of the cases to which the following from
> > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst does not apply:
> > >
> > >  - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
> > >    problem..." type thing).
> > >
> > > Therefore, specifying "net-next" as the target tree here as opposed to
> > > "net" is the correct choice.  
> >
> > The commit message doesn't really explain what happens after.
> >
> > Is the dangling pointer ever accessed?  
> 
> Nothing happens afterwards. He explained that he accessed it once while
> working on his ksz9477 PTP series. There's no code affected by this in
> mainline.

Ah, great, I'll drop the Fixes tag altogether then.