[PATCH v6 1/3] mm: security: introduce init_on_alloc=1 and init_on_free=1 boot options
Kees Cook
keescook at chromium.org
Fri Jun 21 01:37:30 UTC 2019
On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 08:42:27AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 06:48:43PM +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> > [...]
> > diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> > index cd04dbd2b5d0..9c4a8b9a955c 100644
> > --- a/mm/slub.c
> > +++ b/mm/slub.c
> > [...]
> > @@ -2741,8 +2758,14 @@ static __always_inline void *slab_alloc_node(struct kmem_cache *s,
> > prefetch_freepointer(s, next_object);
> > stat(s, ALLOC_FASTPATH);
> > }
> > + /*
> > + * If the object has been wiped upon free, make sure it's fully
> > + * initialized by zeroing out freelist pointer.
> > + */
> > + if (unlikely(slab_want_init_on_free(s)) && object)
> > + *(void **)object = NULL;
In looking at metadata again, I noticed that I don't think this is
correct, as it needs to be using s->offset to find the location of the
freelist pointer:
memset(object + s->offset, 0, sizeof(void *));
> >
> > - if (unlikely(gfpflags & __GFP_ZERO) && object)
> > + if (unlikely(slab_want_init_on_alloc(gfpflags, s)) && object)
> > memset(object, 0, s->object_size);
init_on_alloc is using "object_size" but init_on_free is using "size". I
assume the "alloc" wipe is smaller because metadata was just written
for the allocation?
--
Kees Cook
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list