linux-kernel - Re: Recurring Oops in link_path

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 20 Nov 2015 21:17:46 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
Cc:	Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	LinuxPPC-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	BOUET Serge <serge.bouet@....fr>,
	BARABAN Luc <luc.baraban@....fr>
Subject: Re: Recurring Oops in link_path_walk()

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:58:40PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:

> > Looks like garbage in dentry->d_inode, assuming that reconstruction of
> > the mapping of line numbers to addresses is correct...  Not sure it is,
> > though; what's more, just how does LR manage to point to the insn right
> > after the call of dput(), of all things?
> 
> When "bl dput" is executed, LR gets set to the instruction after the bl. 
>  After dput returns, LR still has that value.  Presumably the call to mntput
> was skipped via the beq.  Nothing else modifies LR between the dput return and
> the faulting address.

OK, AFAICS it's this:
604)        do {
605)                struct path link = *path;
606)                void *cookie;
607) 
608)                res = follow_link(&link, nd, &cookie);
609)                if (res)
610)                        break;
611)                res = walk_component(nd, path, LOOKUP_FOLLOW);
612)                put_link(nd, &link, cookie);
and we are seeing assorted garbage as link.dentry->d_inode at put_link()
call.  What's really interesting, follow_link() has return 0, which means
that it must have passed through
849)        *p = dentry->d_inode->i_op->follow_link(dentry, nd);
with
825)        struct dentry *dentry = link->dentry;
upstream of that and link as seen by follow_link() is &link as seen by
caller (nested_symlink()); IOW, at that point link.dentry->d_inode used to
be a valid pointer.

Do you have something resembling a reproducer or a chance to get a crash
dump at that point?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/