[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] fix security_release_secctx seems broken

On 04.10.2017 09:17, James Morris wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2017, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> Subject: [PATCH] fix security_release_secctx seems broken
>> security_inode_getsecurity() provides the text string value
>> of a security attribute. It does not provide a "secctx".
>> The code in xattr_getsecurity() that calls security_inode_getsecurity()
>> and then calls security_release_secctx() happened to work because
>> SElinux and Smack treat the attribute and the secctx the same way.
>> It fails for cap_inode_getsecurity(), because that module has no
>> secctx that ever needs releasing. It turns out that Smack is the
>> one that's doing things wrong by not allocating memory when instructed
>> to do so by the "alloc" parameter.
>> The fix is simple enough. Change the security_release_secctx() to
>> kfree() because it isn't a secctx being returned by
>> security_inode_getsecurity(). Change Smack to allocate the string when
>> told to do so.
>> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <>
> Looks good to me. I wonder why security_release_secctx was used in the
> first place? (it arrived via commit 42492594)
> > Konstantin: how did you trigger this?

Just "getcap /bin/ping" is enough to tigger leak if file has capabilities.
Selinux shouldn't be loaded because its release_secctx hook call kfree.

But sometimes it takes some time for kmemleak to find leak. Presumably
because stale poiner stays on stack which could be reused nowdays.

> I plan to send this to Linus for -rc4 unless anyone has objections.

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-04 11:30    [W:0.101 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site