netdev - Re: [PATCH net v2] scm: fix negative fds with SO

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: <d1e90994-ca11-4a3e-b627-e3425dc5bf26@yandex.ru>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2024 13:04:53 +0300
From: stsp <stsp2@...dex.ru>
To: Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander@...alicyn.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
 Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
 Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] scm: fix negative fds with SO_PASSPIDFD

17.11.2024 12:40, Alexander Mikhalitsyn пишет:
> Hi Stas,
>
> Actually, it's not a forgotten check. It's intended behavior to pass
> through errors from pidfd_prepare() to
> the userspace. In my first version [1] of the patch I tried to return
> ESRCH instead of EINVAL in your case, but
> then during discussions we decided to remove that.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230316131526.283569-2-aleksandr.mikhalitsyn@canonical.com/
Yes, the patch you referenced above,
only calls put_cmsg() with an error code.

But the code I can see now in git, does
much more. Namely,
if (pidfd_file)
     fd_install(pidfd, pidfd_file);

Or:

put_unused_fd(pidfd);

And I really can't find any ">=0" check
in those funcs. What am I missing?
Is it safe to call fd_install(-22, pidfd_file)?