* [PATCH] umh: fix memory leak on execve failure
@ 2020-04-13 15:42 Vincent Minet
2020-04-13 15:49 ` Vincent Minet
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Vincent Minet @ 2020-04-13 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: Luis Chamberlain, Alexei Starovoitov, Vincent Minet
If a UMH process created by fork_usermode_blob() fails to execute,
a pair of struct file allocated by umh_pipe_setup() will leak.
Under normal conditions, the caller (like bpfilter) needs to manage the
lifetime of the UMH and its two pipes. But when fork_usermode_blob()
fails, the caller doesn't really have a way to know what needs to be
done. It seems better to do the cleanup ourselves in this case.
Fixes: 449325b52b7a ("umh: introduce fork_usermode_blob() helper")
Signed-off-by: Vincent Minet <v.minet@criteo.com>
---
kernel/umh.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
index 7f255b5a8845..20d51e0957e0 100644
--- a/kernel/umh.c
+++ b/kernel/umh.c
@@ -475,6 +475,12 @@ static void umh_clean_and_save_pid(struct subprocess_info *info)
{
struct umh_info *umh_info = info->data;
+ /* cleanup if umh_pipe_setup() was successful but exec failed */
+ if (info->pid && info->retval) {
+ fput(umh_info->pipe_to_umh);
+ fput(umh_info->pipe_from_umh);
+ }
+
argv_free(info->argv);
umh_info->pid = info->pid;
}
--
2.26.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] umh: fix memory leak on execve failure
2020-04-13 15:42 [PATCH] umh: fix memory leak on execve failure Vincent Minet
@ 2020-04-13 15:49 ` Vincent Minet
2020-04-13 22:56 ` Tetsuo Handa
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Vincent Minet @ 2020-04-13 15:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Cc: Luis Chamberlain, Alexei Starovoitov, Kentaro Takeda,
Tetsuo Handa, Vincent Minet
In my case, execve fails with ENOENT on a Tomoyo enabled kernel. It doesn't seem
like CONFIG_BPFILTER and CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO are compatible as it is.
The UMH is executed via "do_execve_file", so we'll have bprm->filename set to
"none". This causes the following call chain to fail and search_binary_handler()
to return ENOENT.
search_binary_handler() ->
security_bprm_check() ->
tomoyo_bprm_check_security() ->
tomoyo_find_next_domain() ->
tomoyo_realpath_nofollow()
I don't really know how to solve this. As I understand it, you really need
a "valid" pathname for Tomoyo and it's not obvious what that should be for the
user-mode blob.
--
Vincent Minet
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] umh: fix memory leak on execve failure
2020-04-13 15:49 ` Vincent Minet
@ 2020-04-13 22:56 ` Tetsuo Handa
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tetsuo Handa @ 2020-04-13 22:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vincent Minet
Cc: linux-kernel, Luis Chamberlain, Alexei Starovoitov,
Alexander Viro, Andrew Morton
Hello.
On 2020/04/14 0:49, Vincent Minet wrote:
> In my case, execve fails with ENOENT on a Tomoyo enabled kernel. It doesn't seem
> like CONFIG_BPFILTER and CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO are compatible as it is.
Thanks for the report. Yes, I know this is a potential problem since 3.19 and
this is a practical problem since 4.18, as explained at
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/f8099e95-c0fc-d133-471e-e0ba97d2230e@i-love.sakura.ne.jp .
>
> The UMH is executed via "do_execve_file", so we'll have bprm->filename set to
> "none". This causes the following call chain to fail and search_binary_handler()
> to return ENOENT.
> search_binary_handler() ->
> security_bprm_check() ->
> tomoyo_bprm_check_security() ->
> tomoyo_find_next_domain() ->
> tomoyo_realpath_nofollow()
>
> I don't really know how to solve this. As I understand it, you really need
> a "valid" pathname for Tomoyo and it's not obvious what that should be for the
> user-mode blob.
It seems that Al wants to change __do_execve_file(), as commented at
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200329031702.GB23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk .
Bringing tomoyo_realpath_nofollow() to __do_execve_file() (in other words,
solve AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW path and !AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW path at the same
time) will be the right (from the perspective of race-free) solution. But
I don't know an API that allows resolving !AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW path starting
from AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW path. I need to wait for Al, for I can't implement
race-free solution from TOMOYO side.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] umh: fix memory leak on execve failure
2020-05-07 22:14 Vincent Minet
@ 2020-05-09 2:10 ` Jakub Kicinski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Kicinski @ 2020-05-09 2:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vincent Minet
Cc: bpf, netdev, linux-kernel, Alexei Starovoitov, Luis Chamberlain,
David S. Miller
On Fri, 8 May 2020 00:14:22 +0200 Vincent Minet wrote:
> If a UMH process created by fork_usermode_blob() fails to execute,
> a pair of struct file allocated by umh_pipe_setup() will leak.
>
> Under normal conditions, the caller (like bpfilter) needs to manage the
> lifetime of the UMH and its two pipes. But when fork_usermode_blob()
> fails, the caller doesn't really have a way to know what needs to be
> done. It seems better to do the cleanup ourselves in this case.
>
> Fixes: 449325b52b7a ("umh: introduce fork_usermode_blob() helper")
> Signed-off-by: Vincent Minet <v.minet@criteo.com>
Applied to net, thank you!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] umh: fix memory leak on execve failure
@ 2020-05-07 22:14 Vincent Minet
2020-05-09 2:10 ` Jakub Kicinski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Vincent Minet @ 2020-05-07 22:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bpf
Cc: netdev, linux-kernel, Alexei Starovoitov, Luis Chamberlain,
David S. Miller, Vincent Minet
If a UMH process created by fork_usermode_blob() fails to execute,
a pair of struct file allocated by umh_pipe_setup() will leak.
Under normal conditions, the caller (like bpfilter) needs to manage the
lifetime of the UMH and its two pipes. But when fork_usermode_blob()
fails, the caller doesn't really have a way to know what needs to be
done. It seems better to do the cleanup ourselves in this case.
Fixes: 449325b52b7a ("umh: introduce fork_usermode_blob() helper")
Signed-off-by: Vincent Minet <v.minet@criteo.com>
---
kernel/umh.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
index 7f255b5a8845..20d51e0957e0 100644
--- a/kernel/umh.c
+++ b/kernel/umh.c
@@ -475,6 +475,12 @@ static void umh_clean_and_save_pid(struct subprocess_info *info)
{
struct umh_info *umh_info = info->data;
+ /* cleanup if umh_pipe_setup() was successful but exec failed */
+ if (info->pid && info->retval) {
+ fput(umh_info->pipe_to_umh);
+ fput(umh_info->pipe_from_umh);
+ }
+
argv_free(info->argv);
umh_info->pid = info->pid;
}
--
2.26.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-05-09 2:11 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-04-13 15:42 [PATCH] umh: fix memory leak on execve failure Vincent Minet
2020-04-13 15:49 ` Vincent Minet
2020-04-13 22:56 ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-05-07 22:14 Vincent Minet
2020-05-09 2:10 ` Jakub Kicinski
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.