Overview
About vulnerability
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tomoyo: don’t emit warning in tomoyo_write_control()
syzbot is reporting too large allocation warning at tomoyo_write_control(), for one can write a very very long line without new line character. To fix this warning, I use __GFP_NOWARN rather than checking for KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE, for practically a valid line should be always shorter than 32KB where the “too small to fail” memory-allocation rule applies.
One might try to write a valid line that is longer than 32KB, but such request will likely fail with -ENOMEM. Therefore, I feel that separately returning -EINVAL when a line is longer than KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE is redundant. There is no need to distinguish over-32KB and over-KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE.
Details
- Affected product:
- AlmaLinux 9.2 ESU , CentOS 6 ELS , CentOS 7 ELS , CentOS 8.4 ELS , CentOS 8.5 ELS , CentOS Stream 8 ELS , CloudLinux 6 ELS , CloudLinux 7 ELS , Oracle Linux 6 ELS , Oracle Linux 7 ELS , RHEL 7 ELS , Ubuntu 16.04 ELS , Ubuntu 18.04 ELS
- Affected packages:
- kernel @ 3.10.0 (+14 more)
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tomoyo: don’t emit warning in tomoyo_write_control()
syzbot is reporting too large allocation warning at tomoyo_write_control(), for one can write a very very long line without new line character. To fix this warning, I use __GFP_NOWARN rather than checking for KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE, for practically a valid line should be always shorter than 32KB where the “too small to fail” memory-allocation rule applies.
One might try to write a valid line that is longer than 32KB, but such request will likely fail with -ENOMEM. Therefore, I feel that separately returning -EINVAL when a line is longer than KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE is redundant. There is no need to distinguish over-32KB and over-KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE.