On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 02/27, Will Drewry wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> +static long seccomp_attach_filter(struct sock_fprog *fprog) >> >> +{ >> >> + struct seccomp_filter *filter; >> >> + unsigned long fp_size = fprog->len * sizeof(struct sock_filter); >> >> + long ret; >> >> + >> >> + if (fprog->len == 0 || fprog->len > BPF_MAXINSNS) >> >> + return -EINVAL; >> > >> > OK, this limits the memory PR_SET_SECCOMP can use. >> > >> > But, >> > >> >> + /* >> >> + * If there is an existing filter, make it the prev and don't drop its >> >> + * task reference. >> >> + */ >> >> + filter->prev = current->seccomp.filter; >> >> + current->seccomp.filter = filter; >> >> + return 0; >> > >> > this doesn't limit the number of filters, looks like a DoS. >> > >> > What if the application simply does prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, dummy_filter) >> > in an endless loop? >> >> It consumes a massive amount of kernel memory and, maybe, the OOM >> killer gives it a boot :) > > may be ;) but most probably oom-killer kills another innocent task, > this memory is not accounted. > >> I wasn't sure what the normal convention was for avoiding memory >> consumption by user processes. Should I just add a sysctl > > Perhaps we can add a sysctl later, but personally I think that we > can start with some "arbitrary" #define BPF_MAXFILTERS. Sounds good - I'll wire something like this up in the next round. >> and a >> per-task counter for the max number of filters? > > Do we really need the counter? attach_filter is not the fast path, > perhaps seccomp_attach_filter() could simply iterate the chain and > count the number? > > In any case, if this hurts perfomance-wise then seccomp_run_filters() > has even more problems. > >> I'm fine doing whatever makes sense here. > > I am fine either way too. > > Oleg. > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html