| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 23:27:23 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
zijun_hu <zijun_hu@...o.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@...il.com>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: mm: GPF in __insert_vmap_area
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 8:05 AM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 1:11 AM, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
>> On 09/06/2016 11:03 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 8:15 AM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> While running syzkaller fuzzer I've got the following GPF:
>>>>
>>>> general protection fault: 0000 [#1] SMP DEBUG_PAGEALLOC KASAN
>>>> Dumping ftrace buffer:
>>>> (ftrace buffer empty)
>>>> Modules linked in:
>>>> CPU: 2 PID: 4268 Comm: syz-executor Not tainted 4.8.0-rc3-next-20160825+
>>>> #8
>>>> Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Bochs
>>>> 01/01/2011
>>>> task: ffff88006a6527c0 task.stack: ffff880052630000
>>>> RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff82e1ccd6>] [<ffffffff82e1ccd6>]
>>>> __list_add_valid+0x26/0xd0 lib/list_debug.c:23
>>>> RSP: 0018:ffff880052637a18 EFLAGS: 00010202
>>>> RAX: dffffc0000000000 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: ffffc90001c87000
>>>> RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: ffff88001344cdb0 RDI: 0000000000000008
>>>> RBP: ffff880052637a30 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000000
>>>> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: ffffffff8a5deee0 R12: ffff88006cc47230
>>>> R13: ffff88001344cdb0 R14: ffff88006cc47230 R15: 0000000000000000
>>>> FS: 00007fbacc97e700(0000) GS:ffff88006d200000(0000)
>>>> knlGS:0000000000000000
>>>> CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
>>>> CR2: 0000000020de7000 CR3: 000000003c4d2000 CR4: 00000000000006e0
>>>> DR0: 000000000000001e DR1: 000000000000001e DR2: 0000000000000000
>>>> DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000600
>>>> Stack:
>>>> ffff88006cc47200 ffff88001344cd98 ffff88006cc47200 ffff880052637a78
>>>> ffffffff817bc6d1 ffff88006cc47208 ffffed000d988e41 ffff88006cc47208
>>>> ffff88006cc3e680 ffffc900035b7000 ffffc900035a7000 ffff88006cc47200
>>>> Call Trace:
>>>> [< inline >] __list_add_rcu include/linux/rculist.h:51
>>>> [< inline >] list_add_rcu include/linux/rculist.h:78
>>>> [<ffffffff817bc6d1>] __insert_vmap_area+0x1c1/0x3c0 mm/vmalloc.c:340
>>>> [<ffffffff817bf544>] alloc_vmap_area+0x614/0x890 mm/vmalloc.c:458
>>>> [<ffffffff817bf8a8>] __get_vm_area_node+0xe8/0x340 mm/vmalloc.c:1377
>>>> [<ffffffff817c332a>] __vmalloc_node_range+0xaa/0x6d0 mm/vmalloc.c:1687
>>>> [< inline >] __vmalloc_node mm/vmalloc.c:1736
>>>> [<ffffffff817c39ab>] __vmalloc+0x5b/0x70 mm/vmalloc.c:1742
>>>> [<ffffffff8166ae9c>] bpf_prog_alloc+0x3c/0x190 kernel/bpf/core.c:82
>>>> [<ffffffff85c40ba9>] bpf_prog_create_from_user+0xa9/0x2c0
>>>> net/core/filter.c:1132
>>>> [< inline >] seccomp_prepare_filter kernel/seccomp.c:373
>>>> [< inline >] seccomp_prepare_user_filter kernel/seccomp.c:408
>>>> [< inline >] seccomp_set_mode_filter kernel/seccomp.c:737
>>>> [<ffffffff815d7687>] do_seccomp+0x317/0x1800 kernel/seccomp.c:787
>>>> [<ffffffff815d8f84>] prctl_set_seccomp+0x34/0x60 kernel/seccomp.c:830
>>>> [< inline >] SYSC_prctl kernel/sys.c:2157
>>>> [<ffffffff813ccf8f>] SyS_prctl+0x82f/0xc80 kernel/sys.c:2075
>>>> [<ffffffff86e10700>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x23/0xc1
>>>> Code: 00 00 00 00 00 55 48 b8 00 00 00 00 00 fc ff df 48 89 e5 41 54
>>>> 49 89 fc 48 8d 7a 08 53 48 89 d3 48 89 fa 48 83 ec 08 48 c1 ea 03 <80>
>>>> 3c 02 00 75 7c 48 8b 53 08 48 39 f2 75 37 48 89 f2 48 b8 00
>>>> RIP [<ffffffff82e1ccd6>] __list_add_valid+0x26/0xd0 lib/list_debug.c:23
>>>> RSP <ffff880052637a18>
>>>> ---[ end trace 983e625f02f00d9f ]---
>>>> Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception
>>>>
>>>> On commit 0f98f121e1670eaa2a2fbb675e07d6ba7f0e146f of linux-next.
>>>> Unfortunately it is not reproducible.
I've spent some more time looking at this, and I'm satisfied that this
isn't a problem introduced by my CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST changes. Thoughts
below...
>>
>>
>> Can you elaborate? You hit this only once and then never again
>> in this or some other, similar call-trace form, right?
>
> Correct.
>
>>>> The crashing line is:
>>>> CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next->prev != prev,
>>>>
>>>> It crashed on KASAN check at (%rax, %rdx), this address corresponds to
>>>> next address = 0x8. So next was ~NULL.
The main issue is that the argument for "next" coming in to the check
is NULL to begin with. That indicates serious problems somewhere else.
If CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST wasn't set, the crash would still have happened
during "next->prev = new;" (since next is NULL):
static inline void __list_add_rcu(struct list_head *new,
struct list_head *prev, struct list_head *next)
{
if (!__list_add_valid(new, prev, next))
return;
new->next = next;
new->prev = prev;
rcu_assign_pointer(list_next_rcu(prev), new);
next->prev = new;
}
>>> Paul, the RCU torture tests passed with the CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST changes,
>>> IIRC, yes? I'd love to rule out some kind of race condition between
>>> the removal and add code for the checking.
>>>
>>> Daniel, IIRC there was some talk about RCU and BPF? Am I remembering
>>
>>
>> --verbose, what talk specifically? There were some fixes longer
>> time ago, but related to eBPF, not cBPF, but even there I don't
>> see currently how it could be related to a va->list corruption
>> triggered in __insert_vmap_area().
>>
>>> that correctly? I'm having a hard time imagining how a list add could
>>> fail (maybe a race between two adds)?
>>
>>
>> Or some use after free that would have corrupted that memory? I
>> would think right now that the path via bpf_prog_alloc() could
>> have triggered, but not necessarily caused the issue, hmm.
>
> That's highly likely.
So, this appears to be a bug somewhere else that happens to manifest
as a crash in the check (and would have crashed in the same place
under CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST before my changes too).
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Nexus Security
Powered by blists - more mailing lists