On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 03:07:13PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 03:03:24PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > The sock counting (sock_update_netprioidx() and sock_update_classid()) was > > missing from pidfd's implementation of received fd installation. Replace > > the open-coded version with a call to the new fd_install_received() > > helper. > > > > Fixes: 8649c322f75c ("pid: Implement pidfd_getfd syscall") > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > kernel/pid.c | 11 +---------- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/pid.c b/kernel/pid.c > > index f1496b757162..24924ec5df0e 100644 > > --- a/kernel/pid.c > > +++ b/kernel/pid.c > > @@ -635,18 +635,9 @@ static int pidfd_getfd(struct pid *pid, int fd) > > if (IS_ERR(file)) > > return PTR_ERR(file); > > > > - ret = security_file_receive(file); > > - if (ret) { > > - fput(file); > > - return ret; > > - } > > - > > - ret = get_unused_fd_flags(O_CLOEXEC); > > + ret = fd_install_received(file, O_CLOEXEC); > > if (ret < 0) > > fput(file); > > - else > > - fd_install(ret, file); > > So someone just sent a fix for pidfd_getfd() that was based on the > changes done here. Hi! Ah yes, that didn't get CCed to me. I'll go reply. > I've been on vacation so didn't have a change to review this series and > I see it's already in linux-next. This introduces a memory leak and > actually proves a point I tried to stress when adding this helper: > fd_install_received() in contrast to fd_install() does _not_ consume a > reference because it takes one before it calls into fd_install(). That > means, you need an unconditional fput() here both in the failure and > error path. Yup, this was a mistake in my refactoring of the pidfs changes. > I strongly suggest though that we simply align the behavior between > fd_install() and fd_install_received() and have the latter simply > consume a reference when it succeeds! Imho, this bug proves that I was > right to insist on this before. ;) I still don't agree: it radically complicates the SCM_RIGHTS and seccomp cases. The primary difference is that fd_install() cannot fail, and it was optimized for this situation. The other file-related helpers that can fail do not consume the reference, so this is in keeping with those as well. -- Kees Cook