linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] vfs: fix race in rcu lookup of pruned dentry

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1107181135170.2722@sister.anvils>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jul 2011 12:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: fix race in rcu lookup of pruned dentry

On Mon, 18 Jul 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > Now, I do agree that maybe that case simply should check the dentry
> > sequence count. I wish all cases did. Hugh patch did that. But the
> > reason I dislike Hugh's patch is that when I say "I wish they all
> > did", I mean that I dislike the special casing. And Hugh's patch just
> > adds *more* special casing for that NULL entry - I'd wish we just
> > always did it regardless of whether it was NULL or not.
> 
> Btw, looking at that, I think Hugh's patch is wrong. It does
> 
>   if (!read_seqcount_retry(&dentry->d_seq, nd->seq))
> 
> but that's after we've done the __follow_mount_rcu() that may actually
> have changed "nd->seq" to the mount-point inode (and has changed
> path->dentry to match it).

Yes, my patch is wrong there.  I started out with
	if (!read_seqcount_retry(&dentry->d_seq, seq);
but seeing __follow_mount_rcu() updates inode and nd->seq, I changed to
	if (!read_seqcount_retry(&dentry->d_seq, nd->seq);
missing the obvious, that it's changing path->dentry when it updates nd->seq.

> 
> Now, it only does it if inode is NULL, so I guess it doesn't matter,
> but it's the kind of inconsistency that I think is really dangerous,
> because it basically compares incompatible sequence numbers.

Yes, it's simply wrong.

> 
> Also, looking at that whole mount-point traversal sequence, it looks
> like __follow_mount_rcu() will happily totally ignore the old sequence
> number when it replaces it with the mount-point sequence number. So it
> looks to me that we have a case where we miss the sequence number
> check that can happen with a positive dentry too!

Al has commented on that.  I'd feel more confident with a patch like
yours, and corrected final check in mine (if we used mine at all)
	if (!read_seqcount_retry(&path->dentry->d_seq, nd->seq);
but ignore me, I'm easily confused by mounts ;)

Hugh
--
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/