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: <546FC4D9.6010600@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 2014 18:03:53 -0500
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>,
	Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipc,sem block sem_lock on sma->lock during sma initialization

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/21/2014 03:42 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:29:27 -0500 Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 11/21/2014 03:09 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 14:52:26 -0500 Rik van Riel
>>> <riel@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> When manipulating just one semaphore with semop, sem_lock
>>>> only takes that single semaphore's lock. This creates a
>>>> problem during initialization of the semaphore array, when
>>>> the data structures used by sem_lock have not been set up
>>>> yet. The sma->lock is already held by newary, and we just
>>>> have to make sure everything else waits on that lock during
>>>> initialization.
>>>> 
>>>> Luckily it is easy to make sem_lock wait on the sma->lock,
>>>> by pretending there is a complex operation in progress while
>>>> the sma is being initialized.
>>>> 
>>>> The newary function already zeroes sma->complex_count before 
>>>> unlocking the sma->lock.
>>> 
>>> What are the runtime effects of the bug?
>>> 
>> 
>> NULL pointer dereference in spin_lock from sem_lock, if it is
>> called before sma->sem_base has been pointed somewhere valid.
> 
> Help us out here.  People need to use this description to work out 
> which kernel versions need the patch and whether to backport the
> fix into their various kernels.  Other people will be starting at
> this changelog wondering "will this fix the bug my customer has
> reported".
> 
> Is there some bug report people can look at?
> 
> What userspace actions trigger this bug?

The reason the bug took almost two years to get noticed is that
it takes one task doing a semop on a semaphore in an array that
is still getting instantiated by newary (getsem) from another
task.

In other words, if you try to use a semaphore array before
getsem returns, you can oops the task that calls semop.

It should not cause any damage to long-living kernel data
structures.

- -- 
All rights reversed
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUb8TZAAoJEM553pKExN6DzJUH/RYSovikk+36KH0uFQN44txj
ZkEM6BsT7I6W9zBiK4OCPpwYCr5gy2xsXH7bLzCgzRV/YmjLFdw20DhDfSo14GO/
1ByYcsUcsZ+lPJZ+g4IKi57VW4T+NLa1T4CoJ84+1QVGKYlpc7mlwc8suTGBhKvQ
5Eq1o1KOE9ZtAG5Go8OYH7frwalkrYE0YJbGN9PW0pUvZ7FilEiMJIkznIetRS6K
WK05dK52DMKeXFxzuxVhSRcCZb2+bHZn3qFOmon6kHbMqgzRZCKMcdydtoIvcFq7
cA5eTt6V6je3XVhc4lsSfP9cHraLDZZIjkaJ856fBpgJ30ypsHcpVY6UKTbFSHo=
=u1Vg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
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