|
Message-ID: <20170604065118.GL6365@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 07:51:30 +0100 From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> To: Matt Brown <matt@...tt.com> Cc: james.l.morris@...cle.com, serge@...lyn.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] Add Trusted Path Execution as a stackable LSM On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 01:24:13AM -0400, Matt Brown wrote: > On 06/03/2017 02:33 AM, Al Viro wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 03, 2017 at 01:53:51AM -0400, Matt Brown wrote: > > > > > +static int tpe_bprm_set_creds(struct linux_binprm *bprm) > > > +{ > > > + struct file *file = bprm->file; > > > + struct inode *inode = d_backing_inode(file->f_path.dentry->d_parent); > > > + struct inode *file_inode = d_backing_inode(file->f_path.dentry); > > > > Bloody wonderful. Do tell, what *does* prevent a race with rename(2) here, > > somehow making sure that your 'inode' won't get freed right under you? > > > > Good catch. How does this look: > > spin_lock(&inode->i_lock); > spin_lock(&file_inode->i_lock); > if (global_nonroot(inode->i_uid) && !uid_eq(inode->i_uid, cred->uid)) > reason1 = "directory not owned by user"; > else if (inode->i_mode & 0002) > reason1 = "file in world-writable directory"; > else if ((inode->i_mode & 0020) && global_nonroot_gid(inode->i_gid)) > reason1 = "file in group-writable directory"; > else if (file_inode->i_mode & 0002) > reason1 = "file is world-writable"; > spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock); > spin_unlock(&file_inode->i_lock); > > and likewise for other places in the code? Er... You have a pointer to object that might get freed by a thread running on another CPU. So you attempt to take a spinlock sitting inside that object. How exactly is that supposed to help anything?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.