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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CANn89iKVBkbd=vmg0edybmStkDo+zM6N3BP2=71mNZmCG=T6HQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2022 08:28:50 -0800 From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> To: Wang Yufen <wangyufen@...wei.com> Cc: linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, paul@...l-moore.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com, martin.lau@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, ast@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, kuba@...nel.org, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: fix memory leak in security_sk_alloc() On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 1:32 AM Wang Yufen <wangyufen@...wei.com> wrote: > > kmemleak reports this issue: > > unreferenced object 0xffff88810b7835c0 (size 32): > comm "test_progs", pid 270, jiffies 4294969007 (age 1621.315s) > hex dump (first 32 bytes): > 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ > 03 00 00 00 03 00 00 00 0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ > backtrace: > [<00000000376cdeab>] kmalloc_trace+0x27/0x110 > [<000000003bcdb3b6>] selinux_sk_alloc_security+0x66/0x110 > [<000000003959008f>] security_sk_alloc+0x47/0x80 > [<00000000e7bc6668>] sk_prot_alloc+0xbd/0x1a0 > [<0000000002d6343a>] sk_alloc+0x3b/0x940 > [<000000009812a46d>] unix_create1+0x8f/0x3d0 > [<000000005ed0976b>] unix_create+0xa1/0x150 > [<0000000086a1d27f>] __sock_create+0x233/0x4a0 > [<00000000cffe3a73>] __sys_socket_create.part.0+0xaa/0x110 > [<0000000007c63f20>] __sys_socket+0x49/0xf0 > [<00000000b08753c8>] __x64_sys_socket+0x42/0x50 > [<00000000b56e26b3>] do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90 > [<000000009b4871b8>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd > > The issue occurs in the following scenarios: > > unix_create1() > sk_alloc() > sk_prot_alloc() > security_sk_alloc() > call_int_hook() > hlist_for_each_entry() > entry1->hook.sk_alloc_security > <-- selinux_sk_alloc_security() succeeded, > <-- sk->security alloced here. > entry2->hook.sk_alloc_security > <-- bpf_lsm_sk_alloc_security() failed > goto out_free; > ... <-- the sk->security not freed, memleak > > To fix, if security_sk_alloc() failed and sk->security not null, > goto out_free_sec to reclaim resources. > > I'm not sure whether this fix makes sense, but if hook lists don't > support this usage, might need to modify the > "tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/lsm_cgroup.c" test case. > > Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") Really the bug has not been added in linux-2.6.12, but this year with bpf lsm ... > Signed-off-by: Wang Yufen <wangyufen@...wei.com> > Cc: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> > --- > net/core/sock.c | 5 ++++- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c > index a3ba035..e457a9d 100644 > --- a/net/core/sock.c > +++ b/net/core/sock.c > @@ -2030,8 +2030,11 @@ static struct sock *sk_prot_alloc(struct proto *prot, gfp_t priority, > sk = kmalloc(prot->obj_size, priority); > > if (sk != NULL) { > - if (security_sk_alloc(sk, family, priority)) > + if (security_sk_alloc(sk, family, priority)) { This does not make sense. A proper fix should be in security_sk_alloc(), not in callers. (Even if there is one caller today,) > + if (sk->sk_security) > + goto out_free_sec; > goto out_free; > + } > > if (!try_module_get(prot->owner)) > goto out_free_sec; > -- > 1.8.3.1 >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists