Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 15 Feb 2022 12:25:41 +0100
From:   Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= <mkoutny@suse.com>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc:     Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Alexey Gladkov <legion@kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        Ran Xiaokai <ran.xiaokai@zte.com.cn>, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] ucounts: Handle wrapping in is_ucounts_overlimit
Message-ID: <20220215112541.GH21589@blackbody.suse.cz>
References: <87o83e2mbu.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
 <20220211021324.4116773-5-ebiederm@xmission.com>
 <20220212223638.GB29214@openwall.com>
 <87k0dxv5eq.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <87k0dxv5eq.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 09:23:09AM -0600, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
> Pretty much. The function essentially only exists so that we can
> handle the weirdness of RLIMIT_NPROC.
> Now that I have discovered the
> weirdness of RLIMIT_NPROC is old historical sloppiness I expect the
> proper solution is to rework how RLIMIT_NPROC operates and to remove
> is_ucounts_overlimit all together.

The fork path could make do with some kind of atomic add+check (similar
to inc_ucounts) and overflows would be sanitized by that. (Seems to
apply to other former RLIMIT_* per-user counters too.)

The is_ucounts_overlimit() and overflowable increment indeed appears
necessary only to satisfy the set*uid+execve pair.

For the sake of bug-fixing, both the patches 5/8 and 6/8 can have 
Reviewed-by: Michal Koutn? <mkoutny@suse.com>


Michal