linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix the race between the fget() and close()

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: <1377530045.8828.120.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date:	Mon, 26 Aug 2013 08:14:05 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Chuansheng Liu <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>
Cc:	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix the race between the fget() and close()

On Tue, 2013-08-27 at 00:12 +0800, Chuansheng Liu wrote:
> When one thread is calling sys_ioctl(), and another thread is calling
> sys_close(), current code has protected most cases.
> 
> But for the below case, it will cause issue:
> T1                                T2                             T3
> sys_close(oldfile)                sys_open(newfile)              sys_ioctl(oldfile)
>  -> __close_fd()
>    lock file_lock
>     assign NULL file
>     put fd to be unused
>    unlock file_lock
> 				   get new fd is same as old
> 				   assign newfile to same fd
> 								   fget_flight()
>                                                                     get the newfile!!!
>     decrease file->f_count
>      file->f_count == 0
>       --> try to release file
> 
> The race is when T1 try to close one oldFD, T3 is trying to ioctl the oldFD,
> if currently the new T2 is trying to open a newfile, it maybe get the newFD is
> same as oldFD.
> 
> And normal case T3 should get NULL file pointer due to released by T1, but T3
> get the newfile pointer, and continue the ioctl accessing.
> 
> It maybe causes unexpectable error, we hit one system panic at do_vfs_ioctl().
> 

Not clear if the bug is not elsewhere.

What panic did you have exactly ?

> Here we can fix it that putting "put_unused_fd()" after filp_close(),
> it can avoid this case.
> 

Three threads doing this kind of stuff cannot expect T3 gets the old or
new file anyway. Its totally unspecified.



--
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/