On 4/17/25 21:52, Zilin Guan wrote:
The unpack_secmark() function currently uses kfree() to release memory
allocated for secmark structures and their labels. However, if a failure
occurs after partially parsing secmark, sensitive data may remain in
memory, posing a security risk.
To mitigate this, replace kfree() with kfree_sensitive() for freeing
secmark structures and their labels, aligning with the approach used
in free_ruleset().
I am submitting this as an RFC to seek freedback on whether this change
is appropriate and aligns with the subsystem's expectations. If
confirmed to be helpful, I will send a formal patch.
Signed-off-by: Zilin Guan <[email protected]>
sorry I am super behind on the backlog, I will get this in to my tree today
Acked-by: John Johansen <[email protected]>
---
security/apparmor/policy_unpack.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/security/apparmor/policy_unpack.c
b/security/apparmor/policy_unpack.c
index 992b74c50..610e09c76 100644
--- a/security/apparmor/policy_unpack.c
+++ b/security/apparmor/policy_unpack.c
@@ -598,8 +598,8 @@ static bool unpack_secmark(struct aa_ext *e, struct
aa_ruleset *rules)
fail:
if (rules->secmark) {
for (i = 0; i < size; i++)
- kfree(rules->secmark[i].label);
- kfree(rules->secmark);
+ kfree_sensitive(rules->secmark[i].label);
+ kfree_sensitive(rules->secmark);
rules->secmark_count = 0;
rules->secmark = NULL;
}
