linux-kernel - Re: perf: use-after-free in perf

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: <20170314153705.GB31766@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:37:05 +0100
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: perf: use-after-free in perf_release

On 03/14, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> Do we want a WARN_ON_ONCE(atomic_read(&tsk->usage)); in free_task()?
> Because in the above scenario we're freeing it with references on.

Not sure, in this case copy_process() should decrement tsk->usage
before free_task(), note the atomic_set(&tsk->usage, 2) in
dup_task_struct().

Perhaps we should just add WARN_ON(tsk->usage != 2) into copy_process()
right before free_task() ?

On the other hand, WARN_ON(atomic_read(&tsk->usage)) looks pointless,
the only caller is put_task_struct().

Oleg.