[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87inczopmo.fsf@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 20:19:27 +0100
From: Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@...hat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, alexander.deucher@....com,
broonie@...nel.org, chris@...is-wilson.co.uk,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, deepa.kernel@...il.com,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com, lucien xin <lucien.xin@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
Vladislav Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next] mqueue: fix IPC namespace use-after-free
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 07:40:43PM +0100, Giuseppe Scrivano wrote:
>> Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@...hat.com> writes:
>>
>> > The only issue I've seen with my version is that if I do:
>> >
>> > # unshare -im /bin/sh
>> > # mount -t mqueue mqueue /dev/mqueue
>> > # touch /dev/mqueue/foo
>> > # umount /dev/mqueue
>> > # mount -t mqueue mqueue /dev/mqueue
>> >
>> > then /dev/mqueue/foo doesn't exist at this point. Your patch does not
>> > have this problem and /dev/mqueue/foo is again accessible after the
>> > second mount.
>>
>> although, how much is that of an issue? Is there any other way to delay
>
> You do realize that with your patch you would end up with worse than that -
> mount/touch/umount and now you've got ->mq_sb non-NULL and pointing to freed
> super_block. With really unpleasant effects when you quit that ipcns...
>
>> the cost of kern_mount_data()? Most containers have /dev/mqueue mounted
>> but it is not really going to be used.
>
> _What_ cost? At mount(2) time you are setting the superblock up anyway, so
> what would you be delaying? kmem_cache_alloc() for struct mount and assignments
> to its fields? That's noise; if anything, I would expect the main cost with
> a plenty of containers to be in sget() scanning the list of mqueue superblocks.
> And we can get rid of that, while we are at it - to hell with mount_ns(), with
> that approach we can just use mount_nodev() instead. The logics in
> mq_internal_mount() will deal with multiple instances - if somebody has already
> triggered creation of internal mount, all subsequent calls in that ipcns will
> end up avoiding kern_mount_data() entirely. And if you have two callers
> racing - sure, you will get two superblocks. Not for long, though - the first
> one to get to setting ->mq_mnt (serialized on mq_lock) wins, the second loses
> and prompty destroys his vfsmount and superblock. I seriously suspect that
> variant below would cut down on the cost a whole lot more - as it is, we have
> the total of O(N^2) spent in the loop inside of sget_userns() when we create
> N ipcns and mount in each of those; this patch should cut that to O(N)...
Thanks for the explanation. I see what you mean now and how this cost is
inevitable as anyway we need to setup the superblock.
Giuseppe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists