[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1486749763.7793.152.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:02:43 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Anoob Soman <anoob.soman@...rix.com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, jarno@....org,
Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>,
philip.pettersson@...il.com, weongyo.linux@...il.com,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: net/packet: use-after-free in packet_rcv_fanout
On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 09:59 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 09:49 -0800, Cong Wang wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 19:19 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > >
> > >> More likely the bug is in fanout_add(), with a buggy sequence in error
> > >> case, and not correct locking.
> > >>
> > >> kfree(po->rollover);
> > >> po->rollover = NULL;
> > >>
> > >> Two cpus entering fanout_add() (using the same af_packet socket,
> > >> syzkaller courtesy...) might both see po->fanout being NULL.
> > >>
> > >> Then they grab the mutex. Too late...
> > >
> > > Patch could be :
> > >
> >
> > For me, clearly the data structure that use-after-free'd is struct sock
> > rather than struct packet_rollover.
>
> Fine. But your patch makes absolutely no sense.
At least, Anoob patch is making a step into the right direction ;)
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/726532/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists