netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] hv_sock: Initializing vsk->trans to NULL to prevent a dangling pointer

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]

Message-ID: <20241107135233.225de6d6@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:52:33 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: Hyunwoo Kim <v4bel@...ori.io>, "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
 Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
 Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>, Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>,
 jasowang@...hat.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman
 <horms@...nel.org>, linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org,
 virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, imv4bel@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] hv_sock: Initializing vsk->trans to NULL to prevent
 a dangling pointer

On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 16:41:02 -0500 Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 11:29:42AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 04:36:04 -0500 Hyunwoo Kim wrote:  
> > > When hvs is released, there is a possibility that vsk->trans may not
> > > be initialized to NULL, which could lead to a dangling pointer.
> > > This issue is resolved by initializing vsk->trans to NULL.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: ae0078fcf0a5 ("hv_sock: implements Hyper-V transport for Virtual Sockets (AF_VSOCK)")
> > > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org  
> > 
> > I don't see the v1 on netdev@, nor a link to it in the change log
> > so I may be missing the context, but the commit message is a bit
> > sparse.
> > 
> > The stable and Fixes tags indicate this is a fix. But the commit
> > message reads like currently no such crash is observed, quote:
> > 
> >                           which could lead to a dangling pointer.
> >                                 ^^^^^
> >                                      ?
> > 
> > Could someone clarify?  
> 
> I think it's just an accent, in certain languages/cultures expressing
> uncertainty is considered polite. Should be "can".

You're probably right, the issue perhaps isn't the phrasing as much 
as the lack of pointing out the code path in which the dangling pointer
would be deferenced.  Hyunwoo Kim, can you provide one?