[PATCH 1/1] Fix memory leak in kernfs_security_xattr_set and kernfs_security_xattr_set
Casey Schaufler
casey at schaufler-ca.com
Fri Jun 1 16:41:39 UTC 2018
On 6/1/2018 9:29 AM, CHANDAN VN wrote:
>>> I agree that the fix can be done simply by using "false" for
>>> smack_inode_getsecurity(), but what happens with kernfs_node_setsecdata()
>>> and smack_inode_notifysecctx(). kernfs_node_setsecdata() is probably ignorable
>>> but smack_inode_notifysecctx() is sending the "ctx" to smack_inode_setsecurity()
>>> and since "ctx" would be NULL because we used "false", smack_inode_setsecurity()
>>> becomes dummy.
>
>> Thank you for pointing this out. You're right, there's more
>> at issue here than changing the alloc flag will fix. I think
>> that calling smack_inode_getsecurity() from smack_inode_getsecctx()
>> is making the code more complicated than it needs to be. I will
>> have a patch shortly.
> If you think the patch would take time or is complicated, I suggest that the kfree() fix should go
> to fix the leaks for now.
Heavens no! The patch is very simple. I'm building a kernel with
it now, and should have it tested and posted within a few hours.
The implementation of smack_inode_getsecctx() that's there is
understandable, but wrong. There's a much better way to do the
job.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list