linux-kernel - Re: [3.3-rc7] sys_poll use after free (hibernate)

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: <20120318192755.GB6589@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 18 Mar 2012 19:27:55 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...fusion.mobi>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [3.3-rc7] sys_poll use after free (hibernate)

On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 12:02:04PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> and that load is from
> 
>     poll_wait(filp, &table->poll->wait, wait);
> 
> where the testing of %rsi and %rcx are the "if (p && wait_address)"
> check in poll_wait(), and %rsi is "table->poll" if I read it all
> correctly.
> 
> And the 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b pattern is obviously POISON_FREE, so
> apparently 'table' has already been freed.
> 
> I suspect the whole sysctl 'poll' code is seriously broken, since it
> seems to depend on those ctl_table pointers being stable over the
> whole open/close sequence, but if somebody unregisters the sysctl,
> it's all gone. The ctl_table doesn't have any refcounting etc, and I
> suspect that your hibernate sequence ends up unregistering some sysctl
> (perhaps as part of a module unload?)

Ewww...  The way it was supposed to work (prio to ->poll() madness) was
that actual IO gets wrapped into grab_header()/sysctl_head_finish()
pair.  proc_sys_poll() doesn't do it, so yes, that post-mortem is
very likely to be correct.

Looking at that sucker a bit more: what the hell is proc_sys_setattr()
doing with vmtruncate(), of all things???  Unless something has changed
very much and very badly, it does *not* use page cache at all...

Incidentally, I wonder if we want the whole thing in fs/proc; the argument
against splitoff to a separate fs used to be "that would break userland
setups - can't ask people to update /etc/fstab or init scripts to mount
that thing on /proc/sys".  Fair enough, but... what's to stop us from slapping
->d_automount() on /proc/sys like that:
	struct vfsmount *mnt = vfs_kern_mount(&sysctlfs_type, 0, "sysctl", 0);
	if (!IS_ERR(mnt))
		mntget(mnt);
	return mnt;
and we are all set.  IOW, now that ->d_automount() stuff is there, we can
do that easily without any userland breakage.  Comments?
--
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/