Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix resource leak bug in auditbeat/socket #41080

Merged

Conversation

fearful-symmetry
Copy link
Contributor

Proposed commit message

This appears to be a long-running resource leak in auditbeat that happens under the following conditions:

  1. We get a fork kretprobe event
  2. auditbeat doesn't know if the return value from the kretprobe the TID for a new thread, or a PID/TID for a new process, but assumes it's a PID/TID that represents a new process.
  3. Auditbeat gets an exit kprobe event when the process/thread exits
  4. only if pid == tid for the given exiting process, it will clean up the process hashmap entry
  5. A thread where pid != tid never gets cleaned up

This slightly alters the logic so if pid != tid && s.processExists(tid), we also clean up the entry for the TID on exit.

Checklist

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have made corresponding change to the default configuration files
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have added an entry in CHANGELOG.next.asciidoc or CHANGELOG-developer.next.asciidoc.

@fearful-symmetry fearful-symmetry self-assigned this Oct 2, 2024
@fearful-symmetry fearful-symmetry requested a review from a team as a code owner October 2, 2024 16:18
@botelastic botelastic bot added the needs_team Indicates that the issue/PR needs a Team:* label label Oct 2, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Oct 2, 2024

This pull request does not have a backport label.
If this is a bug or security fix, could you label this PR @fearful-symmetry? 🙏.
For such, you'll need to label your PR with:

  • The upcoming major version of the Elastic Stack
  • The upcoming minor version of the Elastic Stack (if you're not pushing a breaking change)

To fixup this pull request, you need to add the backport labels for the needed
branches, such as:

  • backport-8./d is the label to automatically backport to the 8./d branch. /d is the digit

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Oct 2, 2024

backport-8.x has been added to help with the transition to the new branch 8.x.
If you don't need it please use backport-skip label and remove the backport-8.x label.

@mergify mergify bot added the backport-8.x Automated backport to the 8.x branch with mergify label Oct 2, 2024
@fearful-symmetry fearful-symmetry added Team:Security-Linux Platform Linux Platform Team in Security Solution and removed needs_team Indicates that the issue/PR needs a Team:* label labels Oct 2, 2024
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/sec-linux-platform (Team:Security-Linux Platform)

Copy link
Contributor

@haesbaert haesbaert left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for fixing this!

@fearful-symmetry fearful-symmetry merged commit 12e846b into elastic:main Oct 4, 2024
20 checks passed
mergify bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2024
* fix resource leak bug in auditbeat/socket

* linter..

* linter...

(cherry picked from commit 12e846b)
fearful-symmetry added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 14, 2024
* fix resource leak bug in auditbeat/socket

* linter..

* linter...

(cherry picked from commit 12e846b)

Co-authored-by: Alex K. <8418476+fearful-symmetry@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport-8.x Automated backport to the 8.x branch with mergify Team:Security-Linux Platform Linux Platform Team in Security Solution
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants