Re: [GIT PULL] SafeSetID LSM changes for 5.4

[Linus Torvalds]

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:41 AM Micah Morton <mortonm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Fix for SafeSetID bug that was introduced in 5.3

So this seems to be a good fix, but the bug itself came from the fact that

    rcu_swap_protected(..)

is so hard to read, and I don't see *why* it's so pointlessly hard to read.

Yes, we have some macros that change their arguments, but they have a
_reason_ to do so (ie they return two different values) and they tend
to be very special in other ways too.

But rcu_swap_protected() has no reason for it's odd semantics.

Looking at that 'handle_policy_update()' function, it's entirely
reasonable to think "pol cannot possibly be NULL". When I looked at
the fix patch, that was my initial reaction too, and it's probably the
reason Jann's commit 03638e62f55f ("LSM: SafeSetID: rewrite userspace
API to atomic updates") had that bug to begin with.

I don't see the original discussion at all, it's not on
Linux-Security-Module for some reason, so I can't tell when/if the
NULL pointer test got deleted.

Anyway, this bug would likely had been avoided if rcu_swap_protected()
just returned the old pointer instead of changing the argument.

There are only a handful or users of that macro, maybe this could be fixed?

Adding some of the RCU parties to the participants..

Also, the commit message for this fix was a mess, I feel. It says
"SafeSetID: Stop releasing uninitialized ruleset", but the ruleset it
releases is perfectly initialized. It just might be NULL because it
doesn't _exist_.

           Linus