On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 4:50 AM Jan Kara <jack(a)suse.cz> wrote:
On Mon 22-08-22 10:29:05, Gaosheng Cui wrote:
> Audit_alloc_mark() assign pathname to audit_mark->path, on error path
> from fsnotify_add_inode_mark(), fsnotify_put_mark will free memory
> of audit_mark->path, but the caller of audit_alloc_mark will free
> the pathname again, so there will be double free problem.
>
> Fix this by resetting audit_mark->path to NULL pointer on error path
> from fsnotify_add_inode_mark().
>
> Fixes: 7b1293234084d ("fsnotify: Add group pointer in
fsnotify_init_mark()")
> Signed-off-by: Gaosheng Cui <cuigaosheng1(a)huawei.com>
Good spotting! The patch looks good to me. Feel free to add:
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack(a)suse.cz>
> ---
> kernel/audit_fsnotify.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/audit_fsnotify.c b/kernel/audit_fsnotify.c
> index 6432a37ac1c9..c565fbf66ac8 100644
> --- a/kernel/audit_fsnotify.c
> +++ b/kernel/audit_fsnotify.c
> @@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ struct audit_fsnotify_mark *audit_alloc_mark(struct audit_krule
*krule, char *pa
>
> ret = fsnotify_add_inode_mark(&audit_mark->mark, inode, 0);
> if (ret < 0) {
> + audit_mark->path = NULL;
> fsnotify_put_mark(&audit_mark->mark);
As I'm tracing the code path from audit through fsnotify, and back
into audit, I'm wondering if we still have a problem. When
fsnotify_add_inode_mark() fails it will end up freeing not just
audit_mark->path, but audit_mark itself via audit_fsnotify_mark_free()
(via a call into fsnotify_put_mark()), yes? If that is the case, I
think the better fix would simply be to just remove the
fsnotify_put_mark() call and add a small comment in this error patch
mentioning that fsnotify_put_mark() will release audit_mark on error.
Thoughts?
> audit_mark = ERR_PTR(ret);
> }
--
paul-moore.com