Commit 37dd0bd0 authored by Eric Paris's avatar Eric Paris Committed by James Morris

SELinux: properly handle empty tty_files list

SELinux has wrongly (since 2004) had an incorrect test for an empty
tty->tty_files list.  With an empty list selinux would be pointing to part
of the tty struct itself and would then proceed to dereference that value
and again dereference that result.  An F10 change to plymouth on a ppc64
system is actually currently triggering this bug.  This patch uses
list_empty() to handle empty lists rather than looking at a meaningless
location.

[note, this fixes the oops reported in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469079]
Signed-off-by: default avatarEric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarJames Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
parent 721d5dfe
......@@ -2126,14 +2126,16 @@ static inline void flush_unauthorized_files(struct files_struct *files)
tty = get_current_tty();
if (tty) {
file_list_lock();
file = list_entry(tty->tty_files.next, typeof(*file), f_u.fu_list);
if (file) {
if (!list_empty(&tty->tty_files)) {
struct inode *inode;
/* Revalidate access to controlling tty.
Use inode_has_perm on the tty inode directly rather
than using file_has_perm, as this particular open
file may belong to another process and we are only
interested in the inode-based check here. */
struct inode *inode = file->f_path.dentry->d_inode;
file = list_first_entry(&tty->tty_files, struct file, f_u.fu_list);
inode = file->f_path.dentry->d_inode;
if (inode_has_perm(current, inode,
FILE__READ | FILE__WRITE, NULL)) {
drop_tty = 1;
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment