[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170324151225.794750500@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 18:58:41 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>, fweisbec@...il.com,
oleg@...hat.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 08/24] perf/core: Fix use-after-free in perf_release()
4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
commit e552a8389aa409e257b7dcba74f67f128f979ccc upstream.
Dmitry reported syzcaller tripped a use-after-free in perf_release().
After much puzzlement Oleg spotted the below scenario:
Task1 Task2
fork()
perf_event_init_task()
/* ... */
goto bad_fork_$foo;
/* ... */
perf_event_free_task()
mutex_lock(ctx->lock)
perf_free_event(B)
perf_event_release_kernel(A)
mutex_lock(A->child_mutex)
list_for_each_entry(child, ...) {
/* child == B */
ctx = B->ctx;
get_ctx(ctx);
mutex_unlock(A->child_mutex);
mutex_lock(A->child_mutex)
list_del_init(B->child_list)
mutex_unlock(A->child_mutex)
/* ... */
mutex_unlock(ctx->lock);
put_ctx() /* >0 */
free_task();
mutex_lock(ctx->lock);
mutex_lock(A->child_mutex);
/* ... */
mutex_unlock(A->child_mutex);
mutex_unlock(ctx->lock)
put_ctx() /* 0 */
ctx->task && !TOMBSTONE
put_task_struct() /* UAF */
This patch closes the hole by making perf_event_free_task() destroy the
task <-> ctx relation such that perf_event_release_kernel() will no longer
observe the now dead task.
Spotted-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Reported-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
Cc: fweisbec@...il.com
Cc: oleg@...hat.com
Fixes: c6e5b73242d2 ("perf: Synchronously clean up child events")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170314155949.GE32474@worktop
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170316125823.140295131@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
kernel/events/core.c | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -10333,6 +10333,17 @@ void perf_event_free_task(struct task_st
continue;
mutex_lock(&ctx->mutex);
+ raw_spin_lock_irq(&ctx->lock);
+ /*
+ * Destroy the task <-> ctx relation and mark the context dead.
+ *
+ * This is important because even though the task hasn't been
+ * exposed yet the context has been (through child_list).
+ */
+ RCU_INIT_POINTER(task->perf_event_ctxp[ctxn], NULL);
+ WRITE_ONCE(ctx->task, TASK_TOMBSTONE);
+ put_task_struct(task); /* cannot be last */
+ raw_spin_unlock_irq(&ctx->lock);
again:
list_for_each_entry_safe(event, tmp, &ctx->pinned_groups,
group_entry)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists