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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue,  3 Dec 2013 10:44:25 +0100
From:	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>,
	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>
Subject: [PATCH] ipc: avoid overflow of semop undo (semadj) value

When trying to understand semop code, I found a small mistake in the check for
semadj (undo) value overflow. The new undo value is not stored immediately
and next potential checks are done against the old value.

The failing scenario is not much practical. One semop call has to do more
operations on the same semaphore. Also semval and semadj must have different
values, so there has to be some operations without SEM_UNDO flag. For example:

	struct sembuf depositor_op[1];
	struct sembuf collector_op[2];

	depositor_op[0].sem_num = 0;
	depositor_op[0].sem_op = 20000;
	depositor_op[0].sem_flg = 0;

	collector_op[0].sem_num = 0;
	collector_op[0].sem_op = -10000;
	collector_op[0].sem_flg = SEM_UNDO;
	collector_op[1].sem_num = 0;
	collector_op[1].sem_op = -10000;
	collector_op[1].sem_flg = SEM_UNDO;

	if (semop(semid, depositor_op, 1) == -1)
		{ perror("Failed to do 1st deposit"); return 1; }

	if (semop(semid, collector_op, 2) == -1)
		{ perror("Failed to do 1st collect"); return 1; }

	if (semop(semid, depositor_op, 1) == -1)
		{ perror("Failed to do 2nd deposit"); return 1; }

	if (semop(semid, collector_op, 2) == -1)
		{ perror("Failed to do 2nd collect"); return 1; }

	return 0;

It passes without error now but the semadj value has overflown in the
2nd collector operation.

Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>
---
 ipc/sem.c | 22 ++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/ipc/sem.c b/ipc/sem.c
index db9d241af133..0d4375761449 100644
--- a/ipc/sem.c
+++ b/ipc/sem.c
@@ -599,7 +599,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(semget, key_t, key, int, nsems, int, semflg)
 static int perform_atomic_semop(struct sem_array *sma, struct sembuf *sops,
 			     int nsops, struct sem_undo *un, int pid)
 {
-	int result, sem_op;
+	int result, undo, sem_op;
 	struct sembuf *sop;
 	struct sem * curr;
 
@@ -607,7 +607,7 @@ static int perform_atomic_semop(struct sem_array *sma, struct sembuf *sops,
 		curr = sma->sem_base + sop->sem_num;
 		sem_op = sop->sem_op;
 		result = curr->semval;
-  
+
 		if (!sem_op && result)
 			goto would_block;
 
@@ -616,25 +616,24 @@ static int perform_atomic_semop(struct sem_array *sma, struct sembuf *sops,
 			goto would_block;
 		if (result > SEMVMX)
 			goto out_of_range;
+
 		if (sop->sem_flg & SEM_UNDO) {
-			int undo = un->semadj[sop->sem_num] - sem_op;
-			/*
-	 		 *	Exceeding the undo range is an error.
-			 */
+			undo = un->semadj[sop->sem_num] - sem_op;
+			/* Exceeding the undo range is an error. */
 			if (undo < (-SEMAEM - 1) || undo > SEMAEM)
 				goto out_of_range;
+			un->semadj[sop->sem_num] = undo;
 		}
+
 		curr->semval = result;
 	}
 
 	sop--;
 	while (sop >= sops) {
 		sma->sem_base[sop->sem_num].sempid = pid;
-		if (sop->sem_flg & SEM_UNDO)
-			un->semadj[sop->sem_num] -= sop->sem_op;
 		sop--;
 	}
-	
+
 	return 0;
 
 out_of_range:
@@ -650,7 +649,10 @@ would_block:
 undo:
 	sop--;
 	while (sop >= sops) {
-		sma->sem_base[sop->sem_num].semval -= sop->sem_op;
+		sem_op = sop->sem_op;
+		sma->sem_base[sop->sem_num].semval -= sem_op;
+		if (sop->sem_flg & SEM_UNDO)
+			un->semadj[sop->sem_num] += sem_op;
 		sop--;
 	}
 
-- 
1.8.4

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ