linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] aio: ctx->dead cleanups

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: <20150617013227.GA23368@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 17 Jun 2015 03:32:27 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>, linux-aio@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] aio: ctx->dead cleanups

Damn, sorry for noise, forgot to mention.

And whatever I missed, this ctx->dead check in aio_ring_remap()
looks wrong anyway. Please correct me.

On 06/17, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 06/17, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > On 06/17, Al Viro wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 01:04:14AM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > Al, please help. We are trying to backport some aio fixes and I am
> > > > absolutely confused by your b2edffdd912b "fix mremap() vs. ioctx_kill()
> > > > race".
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Firstly, I simply can't understand what exactly it tries to fix. OK,
> > > > aio_free_ring() can race with kill and we can remap the soon-to-be-killed
> > > > ctx. So what? kill_ioctx() will the the correct (already re-mapped)
> > > > ctx->mmap_base after it drops mm->ioctx_lock.
> > >
> > > Huh?  kill_ioctx() picks ctx->mmap_base and passes it to vm_munmap().
> > > Which tries to grab mmap_sem, blocks for mremap() from another thread
> > > and waits for it to drop mmap_sem.  By that time ctx->mmap_base has
> > > nothing whatsoever to the argument we'd passed to vm_munmap().
> >
> > Yes. But it seems that you missed another part of my email:
> >
> > 	So it seems to me we only need this change to ensure that move_vma() can
> > 	not succeed if ctx was already removed from ->ioctx_table, or, if we race
> > 	with ioctx_alloc(), it was not added to ->ioctx_table. IOW, we need to
> > 	ensure that move_vma()->aio_ring_mmap() can not race with
> > 	vm_munmap(ctx->mmap_base) in kill_ioctx() or ioctx_alloc(). And this race
> > 	doesn't look really bad. The kernel can't crash, just the application can
> > 	fool itself.
> >
> > So once again, could explain why do we really need to prevent this?
> > Afaics, if the application is stupid, it can only fool itself.
> >
> > And please note that ctx->mmap_base or/and ctx->mmap_size can be wrong
> > anyway. Say, an application can munmap() this vma, or munmap() the part
> > of this vma.
> 
> And speaking of aio_ring_remap() it can "corrupt" ->mmap_base even with
> this patch. Just you need to mremap() the tail of aio-mapped memory.
> 
> No?
> 
> Oleg.

--
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/