Re: [PATCH] ima: fix infinite loop within "ima_match_policy" function.
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Date: 2021-08-23 12:09:29
Also in:
linux-security-module, lkml
Hi Simon, On Mon, 2021-08-23 at 12:02 +0000, THOBY Simon wrote:
Hi Mimi, On 8/23/21 1:57 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote:quoted
On Mon, 2021-08-23 at 08:14 +0000, THOBY Simon wrote:quoted
Hi Liqiong, On 8/23/21 10:06 AM, liqiong wrote:quoted
Hi Simon : Using a temporary ima_rules variable is not working for "ima_policy_next". void *ima_policy_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos) { struct ima_rule_entry *entry = v; - + struct list_head *ima_rules_tmp = rcu_dereference(ima_rules); rcu_read_lock(); entry = list_entry_rcu(entry->list.next, struct ima_rule_entry, list); rcu_read_unlock(); (*pos)++; - return (&entry->list == ima_rules) ? NULL : entry; + return (&entry->list == ima_rules_tmp) ? NULL : entry; } It seems no way to fix "ima_rules" change within this function, it will alway return a entry if "ima_rules" being changed.- I think rcu_dereference() should be called inside the RCU read lock - Maybe we could cheat with: return (&entry->list == &ima_policy_rules || &entry->list == &ima_default_rules) ? NULL : entry; as that's the only two rulesets IMA ever use? Admittedly, this is not as clean as previously, but it should work too. The way I see it, the semaphore solution would not work here either, as ima_policy_next() is called repeatedly as a seq_file (it is set up in ima_fs.c) and we can't control the locking there: we cannot lock across the seq_read() call (that cure could end up be worse than the disease, deadlock-wise), so I fear we cannot protect against a list update while a user is iterating with a lock. So in both cases a cheat like "&entry->list == &ima_policy_rules || &entry->list == &ima_default_rules" maybe need to be considered. What do you think?Is this an overall suggestion or limited to just ima_policy_next()?I was thinking only of ima_policy_next(), I don't think (from what I could see in a short glance) that other functions need such a treatment. The ima_rules_tmp dance is probably safe for the other uses of ima_rules.
Thanks, just making sure it is limited to here. Mimi