linux-kernel - Re: perf: fuzzer KASAN unwind_get_return

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]

Date:   Tue, 15 Nov 2016 14:05:50 -0500 (EST)
From:   Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc:     Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        "davej@...emonkey.org.uk" <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>,
        "dvyukov@...gle.com" <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...il.com>, jpoimboe@...hat.com
Subject: Re: perf: fuzzer KASAN unwind_get_return_address

On Tue, 15 Nov 2016, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 12:43:56PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > 
> > Running on my haswell machine with the imc/uncore patch applied, the 
> > perf_fuzzer next tripped over this issue.
> > 
> > [  202.034495] BAD LUCK: lost 371 message(s) from NMI context!
> > [  202.034496] ==================================================================
> > [  202.048327] BUG: KASAN: stack-out-of-bounds in unwind_get_return_address+0x35/0x80 at addr ffff8800cff0bd90
> > [  202.058826] Read of size 8 by task perf_fuzzer/16254
> > [  202.064186] page:ffffea00033fc2c0 count:1 mapcount:0 mapping:          (null) index:0x0^Ac
> > [  202.073068] flags: 0x1ffff8000000400(reserved)
> > [  202.077885] page dumped because: kasan: bad access detected
> > [  202.083880] CPU: 4 PID: 16254 Comm: perf_fuzzer Not tainted 4.9.0-rc5+ #5
> > [  202.091204] Hardware name: LENOVO 10AM000AUS/SHARKBAY, BIOS FBKT72AUS 01/26/2014
> > [  202.099181]  ffff8800cff0b1d8^Ac ffffffff816bb796^Ac ffff8800cff0b270^Ac ffff8800cff0bd90^Ac
> > [  202.107896]  ffff8800cff0b260^Ac ffffffff812fbe95^Ac 00007ffc9d1ab480^Ac 0000000000000000^Ac
> > [  202.116638]  ffffffff8125117d^Ac 0000000000000092^Ac 0000000000000000^Ac ffff8800cff0b7c0^Ac
> > [  202.125339] Call Trace:
> > [  202.127994]  <NMI>  [<ffffffff816bb796>] dump_stack+0x63/0x8d
> > [  202.134184]  [<ffffffff812fbe95>] kasan_report_error+0x495/0x4c0
> > [  202.140680]  [<ffffffff8125117d>] ? perf_output_begin+0x28d/0x4c0
> > [  202.147228]  [<ffffffff812fc319>] kasan_report+0x39/0x40
> > [  202.152987]  [<ffffffff81095ce5>] ? unwind_get_return_address+0x35/0x80
> > [  202.160094]  [<ffffffff812fa8fe>] __asan_load8+0x5e/0x70
> > [  202.165859]  [<ffffffff81095ce5>] unwind_get_return_address+0x35/0x80
> 
> Josh, any ideas?

>From what I can tell this maps to:

unsigned long unwind_get_return_address(struct unwind_state *state)
{
        unsigned long addr;
        unsigned long *addr_p = unwind_get_return_address_ptr(state);

        if (unwind_done(state))
                return 0;

>>        addr = ftrace_graph_ret_addr(state->task, &state->graph_idx, *addr_p,
                                     addr_p);

        return __kernel_text_address(addr) ? addr : 0;
}