[syzbot] [integrity?] [lsm?] possible deadlock in process_measurement (4)
Shu Han
ebpqwerty472123 at gmail.com
Thu Oct 3 07:35:51 UTC 2024
> My apologies for the delay on this, I was traveling for a bit and
> missed this issue while away.
>
> Looking quickly at the report, I don't believe this is a false positive.
This is the mistake I made when I first watched the report.
It should be a deadlock.
> Looking at the IMA code, specifically the process_measurement()
> function which is called from the security_mmap_file() LSM hook, I'm
> not sure why there is the inode_lock() protected region. Mimi?
> Roberto? My best guess is that locking the inode may have been
> necessary before we moved the IMA inode state into the inode's LSM
> security blob, but I'm not certain.
>
> Mimi and Roberto, can we safely remove the inode locking in
> process_measurement()?
It would be better if IMA could avoid acqurie inode_lock().
If not, then we may need to consider solutions I mentioned in my
previous reply.
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list