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: <20230227110750.6988fca5@kernel.org> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 11:07:50 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Hangyu Hua <hbh25y@...il.com> Cc: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, borisp@...dia.com, john.fastabend@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, davejwatson@...com, aviadye@...lanox.com, ilyal@...lanox.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: tls: fix possible race condition between do_tls_getsockopt_conf() and do_tls_setsockopt_conf() On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 11:26:18 +0800 Hangyu Hua wrote: > In order to reduce ambiguity, I think it may be a good idea only to > lock do_tls_getsockopt_conf() like we did in do_tls_setsockopt() > > It will look like: > > static int do_tls_getsockopt(struct sock *sk, int optname, > char __user *optval, int __user *optlen) > { > int rc = 0; > > switch (optname) { > case TLS_TX: > case TLS_RX: > + lock_sock(sk); > rc = do_tls_getsockopt_conf(sk, optval, optlen, > optname == TLS_TX); > + release_sock(sk); > break; > case TLS_TX_ZEROCOPY_RO: > rc = do_tls_getsockopt_tx_zc(sk, optval, optlen); > break; > case TLS_RX_EXPECT_NO_PAD: > rc = do_tls_getsockopt_no_pad(sk, optval, optlen); > break; > default: > rc = -ENOPROTOOPT; > break; > } > return rc; > } > > Of cause, I will clean the lock in do_tls_getsockopt_conf(). What do you > guys think? I'd suggest to take the lock around the entire switch statement.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists