Re: [PATCH v7 3/9] net/scm: Regularize compat handling of scm_detach_fds()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 01:29:24PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 11:28 AM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Duplicate the cleanups from commit 2618d530dd8b ("net/scm: cleanup
> > scm_detach_fds") into the compat code.
> >
> > Replace open-coded __receive_sock() with a call to the helper.
> >
> > Move the check added in commit 1f466e1f15cf ("net: cleanly handle kernel
> > vs user buffers for ->msg_control") to before the compat call, even
> > though it should be impossible for an in-kernel call to also be compat.
> >
> > Correct the int "flags" argument to unsigned int to match fd_install()
> > and similar APIs.
> >
> > Regularize any remaining differences, including a whitespace issue,
> > a checkpatch warning, and add the check from commit 6900317f5eff ("net,
> > scm: fix PaX detected msg_controllen overflow in scm_detach_fds") which
> > fixed an overflow unique to 64-bit. To avoid confusion when comparing
> > the compat handler to the native handler, just include the same check
> > in the compat handler.
> >
> > Acked-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> 
> Hey Kees,
>   So during the merge window (while chasing a few other regressions),
> I noticed occasionally my Dragonboard 845c running AOSP having trouble
> with the web browser crashing or other apps hanging, and I've bisected
> the issue down to this change.
> 
> Unfortunately it doesn't revert cleanly so I can't validate reverting
> it sorts things against linus/HEAD.  Anyway, I wanted to check and see
> if you had any other reports of similar or any ideas what might be
> going wrong?

Hi; Yes, sorry for the trouble. I had a typo in a refactor of
SCM_RIGHTS. I suspect it'll be fixed by this:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=1fa2c0a0c814fbae0eb3e79a510765225570d043

Can you verify Linus's latest tree works for you? If not, there might be
something else hiding in the corners...

Thanks!

-- 
Kees Cook



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux