summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/fs/proc
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2011-04-18 10:35:30 -0700
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2011-04-18 10:35:30 -0700
commitc78193e9c7bcbf25b8237ad0dec82f805c4ea69b (patch)
tree1d0c3c90770acb003af06d727b794eb002d58ec7 /fs/proc
parenta1b49cb7e2a7961ec3aa8b64860bf480d4ec9077 (diff)
downloadlinux-c78193e9c7bcbf25b8237ad0dec82f805c4ea69b.tar.gz
linux-c78193e9c7bcbf25b8237ad0dec82f805c4ea69b.tar.bz2
linux-c78193e9c7bcbf25b8237ad0dec82f805c4ea69b.zip
next_pidmap: fix overflow condition
next_pidmap() just quietly accepted whatever 'last' pid that was passed in, which is not all that safe when one of the users is /proc. Admittedly the proc code should do some sanity checking on the range (and that will be the next commit), but that doesn't mean that the helper functions should just do that pidmap pointer arithmetic without checking the range of its arguments. So clamp 'last' to PID_MAX_LIMIT. The fact that we then do "last+1" doesn't really matter, the for-loop does check against the end of the pidmap array properly (it's only the actual pointer arithmetic overflow case we need to worry about, and going one bit beyond isn't going to overflow). [ Use PID_MAX_LIMIT rather than pid_max as per Eric Biederman ] Reported-by: Tavis Ormandy <taviso@cmpxchg8b.com> Analyzed-by: Robert Święcki <robert@swiecki.net> Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'fs/proc')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions