diff mbox

[1/1] Fix memory leak in kernfs_security_xattr_set and kernfs_security_xattr_set

Message ID 1527758911-18610-1-git-send-email-chandan.vn@samsung.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

CHANDAN VN May 31, 2018, 9:28 a.m. UTC
From: "sireesha.t" <sireesha.t@samsung.com>

Leak is caused because smack_inode_getsecurity() is allocating memory
using kstrdup(). Though the security_release_secctx() is called, it
would not free the allocated memory. Calling security_release_secctx is
not relevant for this scenario as inode_getsecurity() does not provide a
"secctx".

Similar fix has been mainlined:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=57e7ba04d422c3d41c8426380303ec9b7533ded9

The fix is to replace the security_release_secctx() with a kfree()

Below is the KMEMLEAK dump:
unreferenced object 0xffffffc025e11c80 (size 64):
  comm "systemd-tmpfile", pid 2452, jiffies 4294894464 (age 235587.492s)
  hex dump (first 32 bytes):
    53 79 73 74 65 6d 3a 3a 53 68 61 72 65 64 00 00  System::Shared..
    00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
  backtrace:
    [<ffffff80081be770>] __save_stack_trace+0x28/0x34
    [<ffffff80081bedb8>] create_object+0x130/0x25c
    [<ffffff80088c82f8>] kmemleak_alloc+0x30/0x5c
    [<ffffff80081b3ef0>] __kmalloc_track_caller+0x1cc/0x2a8
    [<ffffff800818673c>] kstrdup+0x3c/0x6c
    [<ffffff80082d78b0>] smack_inode_getsecurity+0xcc/0xec
    [<ffffff80082d78f4>] smack_inode_getsecctx+0x24/0x44
    [<ffffff80082d5ea0>] security_inode_getsecctx+0x50/0x70
    [<ffffff800823bbcc>] kernfs_security_xattr_set+0x74/0xe0
    [<ffffff80081eafec>] __vfs_setxattr+0x74/0x90
    [<ffffff80081eb088>] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x80/0x1ac
    [<ffffff80081eb238>] vfs_setxattr+0x84/0xac
    [<ffffff80081eb374>] setxattr+0x114/0x178
    [<ffffff80081eb44c>] path_setxattr+0x74/0xb8
    [<ffffff80081ebdcc>] SyS_lsetxattr+0x10/0x1c
    [<ffffff800808310c>] __sys_trace_return+0x0/0x4

Signed-off-by: sireesha.t <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN <chandan.vn@samsung.com>
---
 fs/kernfs/inode.c | 3 ++-
 fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Casey Schaufler May 31, 2018, 3:26 p.m. UTC | #1
On 5/31/2018 2:28 AM, CHANDAN VN wrote:
> From: "sireesha.t" <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
>
> Leak is caused because smack_inode_getsecurity() is allocating memory
> using kstrdup(). Though the security_release_secctx() is called, it
> would not free the allocated memory. Calling security_release_secctx is
> not relevant for this scenario as inode_getsecurity() does not provide a
> "secctx".
>
> Similar fix has been mainlined:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=57e7ba04d422c3d41c8426380303ec9b7533ded9
>
> The fix is to replace the security_release_secctx() with a kfree()
>
> Below is the KMEMLEAK dump:
> unreferenced object 0xffffffc025e11c80 (size 64):
>   comm "systemd-tmpfile", pid 2452, jiffies 4294894464 (age 235587.492s)
>   hex dump (first 32 bytes):
>     53 79 73 74 65 6d 3a 3a 53 68 61 72 65 64 00 00  System::Shared..
>     00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
>   backtrace:
>     [<ffffff80081be770>] __save_stack_trace+0x28/0x34
>     [<ffffff80081bedb8>] create_object+0x130/0x25c
>     [<ffffff80088c82f8>] kmemleak_alloc+0x30/0x5c
>     [<ffffff80081b3ef0>] __kmalloc_track_caller+0x1cc/0x2a8
>     [<ffffff800818673c>] kstrdup+0x3c/0x6c
>     [<ffffff80082d78b0>] smack_inode_getsecurity+0xcc/0xec
>     [<ffffff80082d78f4>] smack_inode_getsecctx+0x24/0x44
>     [<ffffff80082d5ea0>] security_inode_getsecctx+0x50/0x70
>     [<ffffff800823bbcc>] kernfs_security_xattr_set+0x74/0xe0
>     [<ffffff80081eafec>] __vfs_setxattr+0x74/0x90
>     [<ffffff80081eb088>] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x80/0x1ac
>     [<ffffff80081eb238>] vfs_setxattr+0x84/0xac
>     [<ffffff80081eb374>] setxattr+0x114/0x178
>     [<ffffff80081eb44c>] path_setxattr+0x74/0xb8
>     [<ffffff80081ebdcc>] SyS_lsetxattr+0x10/0x1c
>     [<ffffff800808310c>] __sys_trace_return+0x0/0x4
>
> Signed-off-by: sireesha.t <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
> Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN <chandan.vn@samsung.com>

Why not:

 static int smack_inode_getsecctx(struct inode *inode, void **ctx, u32 *ctxlen)
 {
-	int len = 0;
-	len = smack_inode_getsecurity(inode, XATTR_SMACK_SUFFIX, ctx, true);
+	int len = smack_inode_getsecurity(inode, XATTR_SMACK_SUFFIX, ctx, false);
 
 	if (len < 0)
 		return len;

> ---
>  fs/kernfs/inode.c | 3 ++-
>  fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/kernfs/inode.c b/fs/kernfs/inode.c
> index a343039..53befb8 100644
> --- a/fs/kernfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/kernfs/inode.c
> @@ -369,7 +369,8 @@ static int kernfs_security_xattr_set(const struct xattr_handler *handler,
>  	mutex_unlock(&kernfs_mutex);
>  
>  	if (secdata)
> -		security_release_secctx(secdata, secdata_len);
> +		kfree(secdata);
> +
>  	return error;
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
> index aaa88c1..1e0dbe9 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
> @@ -2911,7 +2911,7 @@ static int get_parent_attributes(struct svc_export *exp, struct kstat *stat)
>  out:
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NFSD_V4_SECURITY_LABEL
>  	if (context)
> -		security_release_secctx(context, contextlen);
> +		kfree(context);
>  #endif /* CONFIG_NFSD_V4_SECURITY_LABEL */
>  	kfree(acl);
>  	if (tempfh) {

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Tejun Heo May 31, 2018, 3:39 p.m. UTC | #2
(cc'ing more security folks and copying whole body)

So, I'm sure the patch fixes the memory leak but API wise it looks
super confusing.  Can security folks chime in here?  Is this the right
fix?

Thanks.

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 02:58:31PM +0530, CHANDAN VN wrote:
> From: "sireesha.t" <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
> 
> Leak is caused because smack_inode_getsecurity() is allocating memory
> using kstrdup(). Though the security_release_secctx() is called, it
> would not free the allocated memory. Calling security_release_secctx is
> not relevant for this scenario as inode_getsecurity() does not provide a
> "secctx".
> 
> Similar fix has been mainlined:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=57e7ba04d422c3d41c8426380303ec9b7533ded9
> 
> The fix is to replace the security_release_secctx() with a kfree()
> 
> Below is the KMEMLEAK dump:
> unreferenced object 0xffffffc025e11c80 (size 64):
>   comm "systemd-tmpfile", pid 2452, jiffies 4294894464 (age 235587.492s)
>   hex dump (first 32 bytes):
>     53 79 73 74 65 6d 3a 3a 53 68 61 72 65 64 00 00  System::Shared..
>     00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
>   backtrace:
>     [<ffffff80081be770>] __save_stack_trace+0x28/0x34
>     [<ffffff80081bedb8>] create_object+0x130/0x25c
>     [<ffffff80088c82f8>] kmemleak_alloc+0x30/0x5c
>     [<ffffff80081b3ef0>] __kmalloc_track_caller+0x1cc/0x2a8
>     [<ffffff800818673c>] kstrdup+0x3c/0x6c
>     [<ffffff80082d78b0>] smack_inode_getsecurity+0xcc/0xec
>     [<ffffff80082d78f4>] smack_inode_getsecctx+0x24/0x44
>     [<ffffff80082d5ea0>] security_inode_getsecctx+0x50/0x70
>     [<ffffff800823bbcc>] kernfs_security_xattr_set+0x74/0xe0
>     [<ffffff80081eafec>] __vfs_setxattr+0x74/0x90
>     [<ffffff80081eb088>] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x80/0x1ac
>     [<ffffff80081eb238>] vfs_setxattr+0x84/0xac
>     [<ffffff80081eb374>] setxattr+0x114/0x178
>     [<ffffff80081eb44c>] path_setxattr+0x74/0xb8
>     [<ffffff80081ebdcc>] SyS_lsetxattr+0x10/0x1c
>     [<ffffff800808310c>] __sys_trace_return+0x0/0x4
> 
> Signed-off-by: sireesha.t <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
> Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN <chandan.vn@samsung.com>
> ---
>  fs/kernfs/inode.c | 3 ++-
>  fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/kernfs/inode.c b/fs/kernfs/inode.c
> index a343039..53befb8 100644
> --- a/fs/kernfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/kernfs/inode.c
> @@ -369,7 +369,8 @@ static int kernfs_security_xattr_set(const struct xattr_handler *handler,
>  	mutex_unlock(&kernfs_mutex);
>  
>  	if (secdata)
> -		security_release_secctx(secdata, secdata_len);
> +		kfree(secdata);
> +
>  	return error;
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
> index aaa88c1..1e0dbe9 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
> @@ -2911,7 +2911,7 @@ static int get_parent_attributes(struct svc_export *exp, struct kstat *stat)
>  out:
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NFSD_V4_SECURITY_LABEL
>  	if (context)
> -		security_release_secctx(context, contextlen);
> +		kfree(context);
>  #endif /* CONFIG_NFSD_V4_SECURITY_LABEL */
>  	kfree(acl);
>  	if (tempfh) {
> -- 
> 1.9.1
>
Casey Schaufler May 31, 2018, 4:04 p.m. UTC | #3
On 5/31/2018 8:39 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> (cc'ing more security folks and copying whole body)
>
> So, I'm sure the patch fixes the memory leak but API wise it looks
> super confusing.  Can security folks chime in here?  Is this the right
> fix?

security_inode_getsecctx() provides a security context. Technically,
this is a data blob, although both provider provide a null terminated
string. security_inode_getsecurity(), on the other hand, provides a
string to match an attribute name. The former releases the security
context with security_release_secctx(), where the later releases the
string with kfree().

When the Smack hook smack_inode_getsecctx() was added in 2009
for use by labeled NFS the alloc value passed to
smack_inode_getsecurity() was set incorrectly. This wasn't a
major issue, since labeled NFS is a fringe case. When kernfs
started using the hook, it became the issue you discovered.

The reason that we have all this confusion is that SELinux
generates security contexts as needed, while Smack keeps them
around all the time. Releasing an SELinux context frees memory,
while releasing a Smack context is a null operation.

>
> Thanks.
>
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 02:58:31PM +0530, CHANDAN VN wrote:
>> From: "sireesha.t" <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
>>
>> Leak is caused because smack_inode_getsecurity() is allocating memory
>> using kstrdup(). Though the security_release_secctx() is called, it
>> would not free the allocated memory. Calling security_release_secctx is
>> not relevant for this scenario as inode_getsecurity() does not provide a
>> "secctx".
>>
>> Similar fix has been mainlined:
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=57e7ba04d422c3d41c8426380303ec9b7533ded9
>>
>> The fix is to replace the security_release_secctx() with a kfree()
>>
>> Below is the KMEMLEAK dump:
>> unreferenced object 0xffffffc025e11c80 (size 64):
>>   comm "systemd-tmpfile", pid 2452, jiffies 4294894464 (age 235587.492s)
>>   hex dump (first 32 bytes):
>>     53 79 73 74 65 6d 3a 3a 53 68 61 72 65 64 00 00  System::Shared..
>>     00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
>>   backtrace:
>>     [<ffffff80081be770>] __save_stack_trace+0x28/0x34
>>     [<ffffff80081bedb8>] create_object+0x130/0x25c
>>     [<ffffff80088c82f8>] kmemleak_alloc+0x30/0x5c
>>     [<ffffff80081b3ef0>] __kmalloc_track_caller+0x1cc/0x2a8
>>     [<ffffff800818673c>] kstrdup+0x3c/0x6c
>>     [<ffffff80082d78b0>] smack_inode_getsecurity+0xcc/0xec
>>     [<ffffff80082d78f4>] smack_inode_getsecctx+0x24/0x44
>>     [<ffffff80082d5ea0>] security_inode_getsecctx+0x50/0x70
>>     [<ffffff800823bbcc>] kernfs_security_xattr_set+0x74/0xe0
>>     [<ffffff80081eafec>] __vfs_setxattr+0x74/0x90
>>     [<ffffff80081eb088>] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x80/0x1ac
>>     [<ffffff80081eb238>] vfs_setxattr+0x84/0xac
>>     [<ffffff80081eb374>] setxattr+0x114/0x178
>>     [<ffffff80081eb44c>] path_setxattr+0x74/0xb8
>>     [<ffffff80081ebdcc>] SyS_lsetxattr+0x10/0x1c
>>     [<ffffff800808310c>] __sys_trace_return+0x0/0x4
>>
>> Signed-off-by: sireesha.t <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
>> Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN <chandan.vn@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/kernfs/inode.c | 3 ++-
>>  fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c | 2 +-
>>  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/kernfs/inode.c b/fs/kernfs/inode.c
>> index a343039..53befb8 100644
>> --- a/fs/kernfs/inode.c
>> +++ b/fs/kernfs/inode.c
>> @@ -369,7 +369,8 @@ static int kernfs_security_xattr_set(const struct xattr_handler *handler,
>>  	mutex_unlock(&kernfs_mutex);
>>  
>>  	if (secdata)
>> -		security_release_secctx(secdata, secdata_len);
>> +		kfree(secdata);
>> +
>>  	return error;
>>  }
>>  
>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
>> index aaa88c1..1e0dbe9 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
>> @@ -2911,7 +2911,7 @@ static int get_parent_attributes(struct svc_export *exp, struct kstat *stat)
>>  out:
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_NFSD_V4_SECURITY_LABEL
>>  	if (context)
>> -		security_release_secctx(context, contextlen);
>> +		kfree(context);
>>  #endif /* CONFIG_NFSD_V4_SECURITY_LABEL */
>>  	kfree(acl);
>>  	if (tempfh) {
>> -- 
>> 1.9.1
>>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Tejun Heo May 31, 2018, 4:11 p.m. UTC | #4
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:04:25AM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> On 5/31/2018 8:39 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > (cc'ing more security folks and copying whole body)
> >
> > So, I'm sure the patch fixes the memory leak but API wise it looks
> > super confusing.  Can security folks chime in here?  Is this the right
> > fix?
> 
> security_inode_getsecctx() provides a security context. Technically,
> this is a data blob, although both provider provide a null terminated
> string. security_inode_getsecurity(), on the other hand, provides a
> string to match an attribute name. The former releases the security
> context with security_release_secctx(), where the later releases the
> string with kfree().
> 
> When the Smack hook smack_inode_getsecctx() was added in 2009
> for use by labeled NFS the alloc value passed to
> smack_inode_getsecurity() was set incorrectly. This wasn't a
> major issue, since labeled NFS is a fringe case. When kernfs
> started using the hook, it became the issue you discovered.
> 
> The reason that we have all this confusion is that SELinux
> generates security contexts as needed, while Smack keeps them
> around all the time. Releasing an SELinux context frees memory,
> while releasing a Smack context is a null operation.

Any chance this detail can be hidden behind security api?  This looks
pretty error-prone, no?

Thanks.
Casey Schaufler May 31, 2018, 4:22 p.m. UTC | #5
On 5/31/2018 9:11 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:04:25AM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> On 5/31/2018 8:39 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> (cc'ing more security folks and copying whole body)
>>>
>>> So, I'm sure the patch fixes the memory leak but API wise it looks
>>> super confusing.  Can security folks chime in here?  Is this the right
>>> fix?
>> security_inode_getsecctx() provides a security context. Technically,
>> this is a data blob, although both provider provide a null terminated
>> string. security_inode_getsecurity(), on the other hand, provides a
>> string to match an attribute name. The former releases the security
>> context with security_release_secctx(), where the later releases the
>> string with kfree().
>>
>> When the Smack hook smack_inode_getsecctx() was added in 2009
>> for use by labeled NFS the alloc value passed to
>> smack_inode_getsecurity() was set incorrectly. This wasn't a
>> major issue, since labeled NFS is a fringe case. When kernfs
>> started using the hook, it became the issue you discovered.
>>
>> The reason that we have all this confusion is that SELinux
>> generates security contexts as needed, while Smack keeps them
>> around all the time. Releasing an SELinux context frees memory,
>> while releasing a Smack context is a null operation.
> Any chance this detail can be hidden behind security api?  This looks
> pretty error-prone, no?

It *is* hidden behind the security API. The problem is strictly
within the Smack code, where the implementer of smack_inode_getsecctx()
made an error.

>
> Thanks.
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Eric W. Biederman May 31, 2018, 8:57 p.m. UTC | #6
Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> writes:

> On 5/31/2018 2:28 AM, CHANDAN VN wrote:
>> From: "sireesha.t" <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
>>
>> Leak is caused because smack_inode_getsecurity() is allocating memory
>> using kstrdup(). Though the security_release_secctx() is called, it
>> would not free the allocated memory. Calling security_release_secctx is
>> not relevant for this scenario as inode_getsecurity() does not provide a
>> "secctx".
>>
>> Similar fix has been mainlined:
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=57e7ba04d422c3d41c8426380303ec9b7533ded9
>>
>> The fix is to replace the security_release_secctx() with a kfree()
>>
>> Below is the KMEMLEAK dump:
>> unreferenced object 0xffffffc025e11c80 (size 64):
>>   comm "systemd-tmpfile", pid 2452, jiffies 4294894464 (age 235587.492s)
>>   hex dump (first 32 bytes):
>>     53 79 73 74 65 6d 3a 3a 53 68 61 72 65 64 00 00  System::Shared..
>>     00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
>>   backtrace:
>>     [<ffffff80081be770>] __save_stack_trace+0x28/0x34
>>     [<ffffff80081bedb8>] create_object+0x130/0x25c
>>     [<ffffff80088c82f8>] kmemleak_alloc+0x30/0x5c
>>     [<ffffff80081b3ef0>] __kmalloc_track_caller+0x1cc/0x2a8
>>     [<ffffff800818673c>] kstrdup+0x3c/0x6c
>>     [<ffffff80082d78b0>] smack_inode_getsecurity+0xcc/0xec
>>     [<ffffff80082d78f4>] smack_inode_getsecctx+0x24/0x44
>>     [<ffffff80082d5ea0>] security_inode_getsecctx+0x50/0x70
>>     [<ffffff800823bbcc>] kernfs_security_xattr_set+0x74/0xe0
>>     [<ffffff80081eafec>] __vfs_setxattr+0x74/0x90
>>     [<ffffff80081eb088>] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x80/0x1ac
>>     [<ffffff80081eb238>] vfs_setxattr+0x84/0xac
>>     [<ffffff80081eb374>] setxattr+0x114/0x178
>>     [<ffffff80081eb44c>] path_setxattr+0x74/0xb8
>>     [<ffffff80081ebdcc>] SyS_lsetxattr+0x10/0x1c
>>     [<ffffff800808310c>] __sys_trace_return+0x0/0x4
>>
>> Signed-off-by: sireesha.t <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
>> Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN <chandan.vn@samsung.com>
>
> Why not:
>
>  static int smack_inode_getsecctx(struct inode *inode, void **ctx, u32 *ctxlen)
>  {
> -	int len = 0;
> -	len = smack_inode_getsecurity(inode, XATTR_SMACK_SUFFIX, ctx, true);
> +	int len = smack_inode_getsecurity(inode, XATTR_SMACK_SUFFIX, ctx, false);
>
The practical difference here is the true vs the false in the call
to smack_inode_getsecurity?

>  	if (len < 0)
>  		return len;
>

Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Casey Schaufler May 31, 2018, 9:08 p.m. UTC | #7
On 5/31/2018 1:57 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/31/2018 2:28 AM, CHANDAN VN wrote:
>>> From: "sireesha.t" <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
>>>
>>> Leak is caused because smack_inode_getsecurity() is allocating memory
>>> using kstrdup(). Though the security_release_secctx() is called, it
>>> would not free the allocated memory. Calling security_release_secctx is
>>> not relevant for this scenario as inode_getsecurity() does not provide a
>>> "secctx".
>>>
>>> Similar fix has been mainlined:
>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=57e7ba04d422c3d41c8426380303ec9b7533ded9
>>>
>>> The fix is to replace the security_release_secctx() with a kfree()
>>>
>>> Below is the KMEMLEAK dump:
>>> unreferenced object 0xffffffc025e11c80 (size 64):
>>>   comm "systemd-tmpfile", pid 2452, jiffies 4294894464 (age 235587.492s)
>>>   hex dump (first 32 bytes):
>>>     53 79 73 74 65 6d 3a 3a 53 68 61 72 65 64 00 00  System::Shared..
>>>     00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  ................
>>>   backtrace:
>>>     [<ffffff80081be770>] __save_stack_trace+0x28/0x34
>>>     [<ffffff80081bedb8>] create_object+0x130/0x25c
>>>     [<ffffff80088c82f8>] kmemleak_alloc+0x30/0x5c
>>>     [<ffffff80081b3ef0>] __kmalloc_track_caller+0x1cc/0x2a8
>>>     [<ffffff800818673c>] kstrdup+0x3c/0x6c
>>>     [<ffffff80082d78b0>] smack_inode_getsecurity+0xcc/0xec
>>>     [<ffffff80082d78f4>] smack_inode_getsecctx+0x24/0x44
>>>     [<ffffff80082d5ea0>] security_inode_getsecctx+0x50/0x70
>>>     [<ffffff800823bbcc>] kernfs_security_xattr_set+0x74/0xe0
>>>     [<ffffff80081eafec>] __vfs_setxattr+0x74/0x90
>>>     [<ffffff80081eb088>] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x80/0x1ac
>>>     [<ffffff80081eb238>] vfs_setxattr+0x84/0xac
>>>     [<ffffff80081eb374>] setxattr+0x114/0x178
>>>     [<ffffff80081eb44c>] path_setxattr+0x74/0xb8
>>>     [<ffffff80081ebdcc>] SyS_lsetxattr+0x10/0x1c
>>>     [<ffffff800808310c>] __sys_trace_return+0x0/0x4
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: sireesha.t <sireesha.t@samsung.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN <chandan.vn@samsung.com>
>> Why not:
>>
>>  static int smack_inode_getsecctx(struct inode *inode, void **ctx, u32 *ctxlen)
>>  {
>> -	int len = 0;
>> -	len = smack_inode_getsecurity(inode, XATTR_SMACK_SUFFIX, ctx, true);
>> +	int len = smack_inode_getsecurity(inode, XATTR_SMACK_SUFFIX, ctx, false);
>>
> The practical difference here is the true vs the false in the call
> to smack_inode_getsecurity?

That is correct. The author of smack_inode_getsecctx() has a SELinux
background and appears to have missed that Smack is careful not to
allocate memory and make copies of labels when it doesn't need to.

>
>>  	if (len < 0)
>>  		return len;
>>
> Eric
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
CHANDAN VN June 1, 2018, 8:56 a.m. UTC | #8
Hi
 

>On 5/31/2018 9:11 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:

> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:04:25AM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:

>>> On 5/31/2018 8:39 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:

>>>> (cc'ing more security folks and copying whole body)

>>>>

>>>> So, I'm sure the patch fixes the memory leak but API wise it looks

>>>> super confusing.  Can security folks chime in here?  Is this the right

>>>> fix?

>>>> security_inode_getsecctx() provides a security context. Technically,

>>>> this is a data blob, although both provider provide a null terminated

>>>> string. security_inode_getsecurity(), on the other hand, provides a

>>>> string to match an attribute name. The former releases the security

>>>> context with security_release_secctx(), where the later releases the

>>>> string with kfree().

>>>>

>>>> When the Smack hook smack_inode_getsecctx() was added in 2009

>>>> for use by labeled NFS the alloc value passed to

>>> smack_inode_getsecurity() was set incorrectly. This wasn't a

>>> major issue, since labeled NFS is a fringe case. When kernfs

>>> started using the hook, it became the issue you discovered.

>>>

>>> The reason that we have all this confusion is that SELinux

>>> generates security contexts as needed, while Smack keeps them

>>> around all the time. Releasing an SELinux context frees memory,

>>> while releasing a Smack context is a null operation.

>> Any chance this detail can be hidden behind security api?  This looks

>> pretty error-prone, no?

 
>>It *is* hidden behind the security API. The problem is strictly

>>within the Smack code, where the implementer of smack_inode_getsecctx()

>>made an error.


I agree that the fix can be done simply by using "false" for 
smack_inode_getsecurity(), but what happens with kernfs_node_setsecdata()
and smack_inode_notifysecctx(). kernfs_node_setsecdata() is probably ignorable
but smack_inode_notifysecctx() is sending the "ctx" to smack_inode_setsecurity()
and since "ctx" would be NULL because we used "false", smack_inode_setsecurity()
becomes dummy.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Casey Schaufler June 1, 2018, 4:22 p.m. UTC | #9
On 6/1/2018 1:56 AM, CHANDAN VN wrote:
> Hi
>  
>
>> On 5/31/2018 9:11 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>  On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:04:25AM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>>>>  On 5/31/2018 8:39 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>>>>  (cc'ing more security folks and copying whole body)
>>>>>
>>>>>  So, I'm sure the patch fixes the memory leak but API wise it looks
>>>>>  super confusing.  Can security folks chime in here?  Is this the right
>>>>>  fix?
>>>>>  security_inode_getsecctx() provides a security context. Technically,
>>>>>  this is a data blob, although both provider provide a null terminated
>>>>>  string. security_inode_getsecurity(), on the other hand, provides a
>>>>>  string to match an attribute name. The former releases the security
>>>>>  context with security_release_secctx(), where the later releases the
>>>>>  string with kfree().
>>>>>
>>>>>  When the Smack hook smack_inode_getsecctx() was added in 2009
>>>>>  for use by labeled NFS the alloc value passed to
>>>>  smack_inode_getsecurity() was set incorrectly. This wasn't a
>>>>  major issue, since labeled NFS is a fringe case. When kernfs
>>>>  started using the hook, it became the issue you discovered.
>>>>
>>>>  The reason that we have all this confusion is that SELinux
>>>>  generates security contexts as needed, while Smack keeps them
>>>>  around all the time. Releasing an SELinux context frees memory,
>>>>  while releasing a Smack context is a null operation.
>>>  Any chance this detail can be hidden behind security api?  This looks
>>>  pretty error-prone, no?
>  
>>> It *is* hidden behind the security API. The problem is strictly
>>> within the Smack code, where the implementer of smack_inode_getsecctx()
>>> made an error.
> I agree that the fix can be done simply by using "false" for 
> smack_inode_getsecurity(), but what happens with kernfs_node_setsecdata()
> and smack_inode_notifysecctx(). kernfs_node_setsecdata() is probably ignorable
> but smack_inode_notifysecctx() is sending the "ctx" to smack_inode_setsecurity()
> and since "ctx" would be NULL because we used "false", smack_inode_setsecurity()
> becomes dummy.

Thank you for pointing this out. You're right, there's more
at issue here than changing the alloc flag will fix. I think
that calling smack_inode_getsecurity() from smack_inode_getsecctx()
is making the code more complicated than it needs to be. I will
have a patch shortly.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
CHANDAN VN June 1, 2018, 4:29 p.m. UTC | #10
>> I agree that the fix can be done simply by using "false" for 

>> smack_inode_getsecurity(), but what happens with kernfs_node_setsecdata()

>> and smack_inode_notifysecctx(). kernfs_node_setsecdata() is probably ignorable

>> but smack_inode_notifysecctx() is sending the "ctx" to smack_inode_setsecurity()

>> and since "ctx" would be NULL because we used "false", smack_inode_setsecurity()

>> becomes dummy.

 
>Thank you for pointing this out. You're right, there's more

>at issue here than changing the alloc flag will fix. I think

>that calling smack_inode_getsecurity() from smack_inode_getsecctx()

>is making the code more complicated than it needs to be. I will

>have a patch shortly.


If you think the patch would take time or is complicated, I suggest that the kfree() fix should go
to fix the leaks for now. 
 
 
 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Casey Schaufler June 1, 2018, 4:41 p.m. UTC | #11
On 6/1/2018 9:29 AM, CHANDAN VN wrote:
>>>  I agree that the fix can be done simply by using "false" for 
>>>  smack_inode_getsecurity(), but what happens with kernfs_node_setsecdata()
>>>  and smack_inode_notifysecctx(). kernfs_node_setsecdata() is probably ignorable
>>>  but smack_inode_notifysecctx() is sending the "ctx" to smack_inode_setsecurity()
>>>  and since "ctx" would be NULL because we used "false", smack_inode_setsecurity()
>>>  becomes dummy.
>  
>> Thank you for pointing this out. You're right, there's more
>> at issue here than changing the alloc flag will fix. I think
>> that calling smack_inode_getsecurity() from smack_inode_getsecctx()
>> is making the code more complicated than it needs to be. I will
>> have a patch shortly.
> If you think the patch would take time or is complicated, I suggest that the kfree() fix should go
> to fix the leaks for now.

Heavens no! The patch is very simple. I'm building a kernel with
it now, and should have it tested and posted within a few hours.
The implementation of smack_inode_getsecctx() that's there is
understandable, but wrong. There's a much better way to do the
job.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/fs/kernfs/inode.c b/fs/kernfs/inode.c
index a343039..53befb8 100644
--- a/fs/kernfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/kernfs/inode.c
@@ -369,7 +369,8 @@  static int kernfs_security_xattr_set(const struct xattr_handler *handler,
 	mutex_unlock(&kernfs_mutex);
 
 	if (secdata)
-		security_release_secctx(secdata, secdata_len);
+		kfree(secdata);
+
 	return error;
 }
 
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
index aaa88c1..1e0dbe9 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4xdr.c
@@ -2911,7 +2911,7 @@  static int get_parent_attributes(struct svc_export *exp, struct kstat *stat)
 out:
 #ifdef CONFIG_NFSD_V4_SECURITY_LABEL
 	if (context)
-		security_release_secctx(context, contextlen);
+		kfree(context);
 #endif /* CONFIG_NFSD_V4_SECURITY_LABEL */
 	kfree(acl);
 	if (tempfh) {