From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Vasily Kulikov <segoon@openwall.com>
Cc: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@ubuntu.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] user_ns: fix missing limiting of user_ns counts
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 19:21:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121228192152.GA4939@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121228190435.GA8690@cachalot>
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:04:35PM +0400, Vasily Kulikov wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but this is not a solution. Kernel is not x86-only; there are
> > architectures with far bigger minimal stack frame size. E.g. on sparc64
> > every fucking stack frame is at least 176 bytes. So your 100 calls deep
> > call chain will happily overflow the damn stack all by itself - kernel
> > stack on sparc64 is 16Kb total, including struct thread_info living there.
>
> Understood. How to properly fix it then? Looks like there are quite
> many kernel structures which may reference other structures which
> indirectly reference each other via kref, IOW it is not user_ns specific
> issue. With unprivileged user_ns the way it should be freed must be
> somehow changed.
There are many damn good reasons why kref should *not* be used without
thinking. It's been oversold as easy solution to all refcounting problems;
it isn't one. Don't use it here.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-28 19:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-28 17:56 Vasily Kulikov
2012-12-28 18:43 ` Al Viro
2012-12-28 19:04 ` Vasily Kulikov
2012-12-28 19:21 ` Al Viro [this message]
2012-12-29 4:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-12-29 5:13 ` Al Viro
2012-12-29 5:22 ` Vasily Kulikov
2012-12-30 11:00 ` Vasily Kulikov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121228192152.GA4939@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=segoon@openwall.com \
--cc=serge.hallyn@ubuntu.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome