Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:20:39 +0530 (IST)
From: P J P <ppandit@redhat.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, halfdog <me@halfdog.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] exec: do not leave bprm->interp on stack
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5j+ObQAPBruUGpM2Vu_Fr91dNwdmy=ryJ2bOmm18qJEWnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1211161804520.16891@wniryva.cad.erqung.pbz>
References: <20121024232032.GA31129@www.outflux.net> <20121025041620.GH2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <CAGXu5jLwvcpyMp8RcF8aFySKkkj+17ovNOvC_r88+D0fQW7CsQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1210251636480.23155@wniryva.cad.erqung.pbz> <20121025120952.GI2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20121025123843.GJ2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1210262242310.6224@wniryva.cad.erqung.pbz> <20121026183601.GR2616@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1210271450570.15637@wniryva.cad.erqung.pbz> <CAGXu5j+JdbehZK1KXHMZGJ8_d10Z25oDQ7V=J3OGXKmF-=wg6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.LFD.2.02.1210272337550.22424@wniryva.cad.erqung.pbz> <CAGXu5jJNZH4fQ6U197+A0nJeawHk+8yNnQj+mKft65L9o6_z7A@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1211061332470.18031@wniryva.cad.erqung.pbz>
 <CAGXu5j+ObQAPBruUGpM2Vu_Fr91dNwdmy=ryJ2bOmm18qJEWnQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 949
Lines: 24


  Hello folks,

+-- On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Kees Cook wrote --+
| >   Al, what's your take on the *rare* extra call to request_module?
| 
| Without any other feedback, I'd like to use my minimal allocation
| patch, since it fixes the problem and doesn't change any of the
| semantics of how/when loading happens.

  I did apply and test this patch with kernel-3.5.3 on my machine. Now it 
seems to disclose dynamically allocated(kstrdup) bytes, instead of the call 
stack bytes. Recursions still dodge and exceed the limit of 
BINPRM_MAX_RECURSION(4).

Please pardon my asking, but - how is this a fix?
--
Prasad J Pandit / Red Hat Security Response Team
DB7A 84C5 D3F9 7CD1 B5EB  C939 D048 7860 3655 602B
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/