Re: [PATCH] setrlimit incorrectly allows hard limits to exceed soft limits

Kingsley Cheung
2002-11-11T04:53:01Z

Oops, should be after the copy :-(

--- sys.c Sat Aug 3 10:39:46 2002
+++ edited.sys.c Mon Nov 11 15:56:51 2002
@@ -1120,6 +1120,8 @@
return -EINVAL;
if(copy_from_user(&new_rlim, rlim, sizeof(*rlim)))
return -EFAULT;
+ if (new_rlim.rlim_cur > new_rlim.rlim_max)
+ return -EINVAL;
old_rlim = current->rlim + resource;
if (((new_rlim.rlim_cur > old_rlim->rlim_max) ||
(new_rlim.rlim_max > old_rlim->rlim_max)) &&

On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 03:10:05PM +1100, Kingsley Cheung wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In 2.4.19 (also 2.5.46) setrlimit code only ever makes a comparison to
> check the old soft limit with the new soft limit and the new hard
> limit with the old hard limit. There is never a check to ensure the
> new soft limit never exceeds the new hard limit.
>
> Just try "ulimit -H -m 10000" for memory limits that were not
> previously set. You end up with (hard limit = 10000) < (soft limit =
> unlimited).
>
> Fix is trivial.
>
> --- sys.c Sat Aug 3 10:39:46 2002
> +++ edited.sys.c Mon Nov 11 14:49:19 2002
> @@ -1118,6 +1118,8 @@
>
> if (resource >= RLIM_NLIMITS)
> return -EINVAL;
> + if (new_rlim.rlim_cur > new_rlim.rlim_max)
> + return -EINVAL;
> if(copy_from_user(&new_rlim, rlim, sizeof(*rlim)))
> return -EFAULT;
> old_rlim = current->rlim + resource;
>

--
Kingsley