linux-kernel - Re: perf: use-after-free in perf

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 6 Mar 2017 14:34:50 +0100
From:   Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: perf: use-after-free in perf_release

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:57:07AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
>> ==================================================================
>> BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in atomic_dec_and_test
>> arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h:123 [inline] at addr ffff880079c30158
>> BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in put_task_struct
>> include/linux/sched/task.h:93 [inline] at addr ffff880079c30158
>> BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in put_ctx+0xcf/0x110
>
> FWIW, this output is very confusing, is this a result of your
> post-processing replicating the line for every 'inlined' part?


Yes.
We probably should not do this inlining in the header line. But the
problem is that it is very difficult to understand that it is a header
line in general.


>> kernel/events/core.c:1131 at addr ffff880079c30158
>> Write of size 4 by task syz-executor6/25698
>
>>  atomic_dec_and_test arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h:123 [inline]
>>  put_task_struct include/linux/sched/task.h:93 [inline]
>>  put_ctx+0xcf/0x110 kernel/events/core.c:1131
>>  perf_event_release_kernel+0x3ad/0xc90 kernel/events/core.c:4322
>>  perf_release+0x37/0x50 kernel/events/core.c:4338
>>  __fput+0x332/0x800 fs/file_table.c:209
>>  ____fput+0x15/0x20 fs/file_table.c:245
>>  task_work_run+0x197/0x260 kernel/task_work.c:116
>>  exit_task_work include/linux/task_work.h:21 [inline]
>>  do_exit+0xb38/0x29c0 kernel/exit.c:880
>>  do_group_exit+0x149/0x420 kernel/exit.c:984
>>  get_signal+0x7e0/0x1820 kernel/signal.c:2318
>>  do_signal+0xd2/0x2190 arch/x86/kernel/signal.c:808
>>  exit_to_usermode_loop+0x200/0x2a0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:157
>>  syscall_return_slowpath arch/x86/entry/common.c:191 [inline]
>>  do_syscall_64+0x6fc/0x930 arch/x86/entry/common.c:286
>>  entry_SYSCALL64_slow_path+0x25/0x25
>
> So this is fput()..
>
>
>> Freed:
>> PID = 25681
>>  save_stack_trace+0x16/0x20 arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c:59
>>  save_stack+0x43/0xd0 mm/kasan/kasan.c:513
>>  set_track mm/kasan/kasan.c:525 [inline]
>>  kasan_slab_free+0x6f/0xb0 mm/kasan/kasan.c:589
>>  __cache_free mm/slab.c:3514 [inline]
>>  kmem_cache_free+0x71/0x240 mm/slab.c:3774
>>  free_task_struct kernel/fork.c:158 [inline]
>>  free_task+0x151/0x1d0 kernel/fork.c:370
>>  copy_process.part.38+0x18e5/0x4aa0 kernel/fork.c:1931
>>  copy_process kernel/fork.c:1531 [inline]
>>  _do_fork+0x200/0x1010 kernel/fork.c:1994
>>  SYSC_clone kernel/fork.c:2104 [inline]
>>  SyS_clone+0x37/0x50 kernel/fork.c:2098
>>  do_syscall_64+0x2e8/0x930 arch/x86/entry/common.c:281
>>  return_from_SYSCALL_64+0x0/0x7a
>
> and this is a failed fork().
>
>
> However, inherited events don't have a filedesc to fput(), and
> similarly, a task that fails for has never been visible to attach a perf
> event to because it never hits the pid-hash.
>
> Or so it is assumed.
>
> I'm forever getting lost in the PID code. Oleg, is there any way
> find_task_by_vpid() can return a task that can still fail fork() ?


FWIW here are 2 syzkaller programs that triggered the bug:
https://gist.githubusercontent.com/dvyukov/d67f980050589775237a7fbdff226bec/raw/4bca72861cb2ede64059b6dad403e19f425a361f/gistfile1.txt
They look very similar, so most likely they are a mutation of the same
program. Which may suggest that there is something in that program
that provokes the bug. Note that the calls in these programs are
executed potentially in multiple threads. But at least it can give
some idea wrt e.g. flags passed to perf_event_open.