On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 08:35:20PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (07/04/14 20:30), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 08:03:32PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >> On (07/04/14 18:53), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >> >On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 03:41:38PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >> >> On (04/04/14 15:18), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >> >> >On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 07:11:37PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 05:53:31PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >> >> >> > On (20/03/14 17:21), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >> >> >> > >On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 05:00:00PM +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
> >> >> >> > >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 04:20:59PM +0100, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> >> >> >> > >> > ehlo,
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > debug_prg_name is used in debug_fn and it was allocated under
> >> >> >> > >> > talloc context "kr". The variable "kr" was removed before the
> >> >> >> > >> > last debug
> >> >> >> > >> > messages in function main. It is very little change that it
> >> >> >> > >> > will be overridden.
> >> >> >> > >> >
> >> >> >> > >> > It is possible to see this issue with exported environment
> >> >> >> > >> > variable
> >> >> >> > >> > TALLOC_FREE_FILL=255
> >> >> >> > >>
> >> >> >> > >> I'm pretty sure the patch works as expected and fixes the
> >> >> >> > >> isssue. But I
> >> >> >> > >> wonder if a different approach might be better? I think it does
> >> >> >> > >> not make
> >> >> >> > >> sense to allocate debug_prg_name on a given talloc context but
> >> >> >> > >> that it
> >> >> >> > >> would be better to just allocate it on NULL. This is e.g. done
> >> >> >> > >> in the
> >> >> >> > >> ldap_child (here a talloc_free() is missing on exit but this
> >> >> >> > >> would be a
> >> >> >> > >> different story). Then debug_prg_name can even be allocate
> >> >> >> > >> before kr
> >> >> >> > >> and the debug messages for a failed allocation of kr can use
> >> >> >> > >> the right
> >> >> >> > >> program name and not "sssd".
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > >I agree, because also given that krb5_child is a short lived
> >> >> >> > >process,
> >> >> >> > >we don't care too much about possible leaks.
> >> >> >> > No problem.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > New version attached.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > LS
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> This version works for me, do you want to also add a talloc_free() on
> >> >> >> exit to be clean or do you also consider this not needed for
> >> >> >> short-lived
> >> >> >> processes?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Thinking again, it would be nicer to explicitly free the string on
> >> >> >child
> >> >> >exit. Yes, the leak it's not a big deal for a short-lived process but
> >> >> >it
> >> >> >would read better.
> >> >>
> >> >> With the first version of patch string was freed, because it was
> >> >> alocated
> >> >> under "kr" context.
> >> >> Now, you should decide which version do you want to push :-)
> >> >>
> >> >> LS
> >> >
> >> >I think it's easier to explain with a patch :-)
> >>
> >> You didn't test your patch :-)
> >
> >I left that to you :-)
> >
> >See another proposal below:
> >
> >>
> >> diff --git a/src/providers/krb5/krb5_child.c
> >> b/src/providers/krb5/krb5_child.c
> >> index
> >> 764f6ac7bf57b1f7d882961b7c6fa518818aaf23..aec0d9389dd4f3ae005b73ff12ca8293cee7560f
> >> 100644
> >> --- a/src/providers/krb5/krb5_child.c
> >> +++ b/src/providers/krb5/krb5_child.c
> >> @@ -2013,6 +2013,7 @@ int main(int argc, const char *argv[])
> >> DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "talloc failed.\n");
> >> exit(-1);
> >> }
> >> + talloc_steal(kr, debug_prg_name);
> >>
> >> if (debug_fd != -1) {
> >> ret = set_debug_file_from_fd(debug_fd);
> >>
> >> // snip
> >> done:
> >> krb5_cleanup(kr);
> >> talloc_free(kr);
> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> //debug_prg_name is freed
> >>
> >> if (ret == EOK) {
> >> DEBUG(SSSDBG_TRACE_FUNC, "krb5_child completed successfully\n");
> >> ^^^^^^
> >> // use after free
> > talloc_free(tmp_str);
> >> exit(0);
> >> } else {
> >> DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "krb5_child failed!\n");
> >> ^^^^^^
> >> // use after free
> > talloc_free(tmp_str);
> >> exit(-1);
> >> }
> >>
> >
> >Or just:
> > done:
> > krb5_cleanup(kr);
> > talloc_free(kr);
> > if (ret == EOK) {
> > DEBUG(SSSDBG_TRACE_FUNC, "krb5_child completed successfully\n");
> > talloc_free(tmp_str);
> > rv = 0;
> > } else {
> > DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "krb5_child failed!\n");
> > talloc_free(tmp_str);
> > rv = -1;
> > }
> > exit(rv);
>
> And now, you can compare your solution with the first patch from this thread
> and then try to read replies to the 1st mail from this thread :-)
Except first patch didn't allocate on NULL? I think that was the meat of
Sumit's comments..
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
