linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] netfilter: nf_conntrack: fix RCU race in nf_conntrack_find

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: <1389281025.31367.35.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Thu, 09 Jan 2014 07:23:45 -0800
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Andrew Vagin <avagin@...il.com>
Cc:	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Andrey Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netfilter@...r.kernel.org,
	coreteam@...filter.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vvs@...nvz.org,
	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: nf_conntrack: fix RCU race in
 nf_conntrack_find_get

On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 09:24 +0400, Andrew Vagin wrote:

> I have one more question. Looks like I found another problem.
> 
> init_conntrack:
>         hlist_nulls_add_head_rcu(&ct->tuplehash[IP_CT_DIR_ORIGINAL].hnnode,
>                       &net->ct.unconfirmed);
> 
> __nf_conntrack_hash_insert:
> 	hlist_nulls_add_head_rcu(&ct->tuplehash[IP_CT_DIR_ORIGINAL].hnnode,
> 		   &net->ct.hash[hash]);
> 
> We use one hlist_nulls_node to add a conntrack into two different lists.
> As far as I understand, it's unacceptable in case of
> SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU.

I guess you missed :

net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c:1598: INIT_HLIST_NULLS_HEAD(&net->ct.unconfirmed, UNCONFIRMED_NULLS_VAL);


> 
> Lets imagine that we have two threads. The first one enumerates objects
> from a first list, the second one recreates an object and insert it in a
> second list.  If a first thread in this moment stays on the object, it
> can read "next", when it's in the second list, so it will continue
> to enumerate objects from the second list. It is not what we want, isn't
> it?
> 
> cpu1				cpu2
> 				hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu(ct)
> destroy_conntrack
>  kmem_cache_free
> 
> init_conntrack
>  hlist_nulls_add_head_rcu
> 				ct = ct->next
> 

This will be fine.

I think we even have a counter to count number of occurrence of this
rare event. (I personally never read a non null search_restart value)

 NF_CT_STAT_INC(net, search_restart); 



--
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/