Subject: Re: memory leak in do_ipv6_setsockopt

From: Daniel Borkmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2015 15:49:07 +0100

On 12/01/2015 03:38 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 15:24 +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 12/01/2015 03:16 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2015-12-01 at 15:07 +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, we miss inet6_destroy_sock() in SCTP. :-(
>>>>
>>>> Looks good to me.
>>>
>>> OK, I will send a formal (and tested ;) ) patch.
>>
>> I was shortly wondering whether there could be a use-after-free by
>> doing this after sctp_destroy_sock() due to the sctp_endpoint_destroy()
>> that would eventually drop a ref on the socket, but the endpoint holds
>> a separate ref, so we should be good.
>
> More generically ->destroy() caller must keep a reference on the socket.
>
> inet_csk_destroy_sock() for example uses sk after
>
> sk->sk_prot->destroy(sk);

Right, and later on, we might call into ->sk_destruct() when there are no
more refs (in SCTP case: sctp_destruct_sock()).

Thanks,
Daniel