linux-kernel - Race in check_stack_guard

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALCETrU9bLB2WziLCd9sopMoQVLhs7wXUj_=wOrV+Oh6T05PDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 25 Nov 2013 15:30:26 -0800
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Race in check_stack_guard_page?

I was looking at the stack expansion code, and I'm not convinced it's
safe.  Aside from the obvious scariness of down_read(&mmap_sem) not
actually preventing vma changes, I think there's a real race.  Suppose
that you have a VM_GROWSDOWN vma above a VM_GROWSUP vma with a
single-page gap between them.  Suppose further that they have
different anon_vma roots.

If one ends up in expand_downwards and the other ends up in
expand_upwards at the same time, then each one can take
page_table_lock without re-checking that there's still room to expand.
 The result will be two vmas that share a page.

(This is presumably only possible on ia64.)

--Andy
--
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/