[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhSQLkRSby3-9PGZZrLMGB4Fe8ZZjupHRm0nVxco85A1fQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 20:25:18 -0400
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>, NitinGote <nitin.r.gote@...el.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>, Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
SElinux list <selinux@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selinux: convert struct sidtab count to refcount_t
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 9:18 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 1:35 PM NitinGote <nitin.r.gote@...el.com> wrote:
> > refcount_t type and corresponding API should be
> > used instead of atomic_t when the variable is used as
> > a reference counter. This allows to avoid accidental
> > refcounter overflows that might lead to use-after-free
> > situations.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: NitinGote <nitin.r.gote@...el.com>
>
> Nack.
>
> The 'count' variable is not used as a reference counter here. It
> tracks the number of entries in sidtab, which is a very specific
> lookup table that can only grow (the count never decreases). I only
> made it atomic because the variable is read outside of the sidtab's
> spin lock and thus the reads and writes to it need to be guaranteed to
> be atomic. The counter is only updated under the spin lock, so
> insertions do not race with each other.
Agreed, this should be changed to use refcount_t.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
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.
