linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.20 22/52] vxlan: test dev->flags & IFF_UP before calling gro_cells

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: <20190318083846.064269218@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 18 Mar 2019 10:25:09 +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, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [PATCH 4.20 22/52] vxlan: test dev->flags & IFF_UP before calling gro_cells_receive()

4.20-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>

[ Upstream commit 59cbf56fcd98ba2a715b6e97c4e43f773f956393 ]

Same reasons than the ones explained in commit 4179cb5a4c92
("vxlan: test dev->flags & IFF_UP before calling netif_rx()")

netif_rx() or gro_cells_receive() must be called under a strict contract.

At device dismantle phase, core networking clears IFF_UP
and flush_all_backlogs() is called after rcu grace period
to make sure no incoming packet might be in a cpu backlog
and still referencing the device.

A similar protocol is used for gro_cells infrastructure, as
gro_cells_destroy() will be called only after a full rcu
grace period is observed after IFF_UP has been cleared.

Most drivers call netif_rx() from their interrupt handler,
and since the interrupts are disabled at device dismantle,
netif_rx() does not have to check dev->flags & IFF_UP

Virtual drivers do not have this guarantee, and must
therefore make the check themselves.

Otherwise we risk use-after-free and/or crashes.

Fixes: d342894c5d2f ("vxlan: virtual extensible lan")
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 drivers/net/vxlan.c |   11 +++++++++++
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)

--- a/drivers/net/vxlan.c
+++ b/drivers/net/vxlan.c
@@ -1538,6 +1538,14 @@ static int vxlan_rcv(struct sock *sk, st
 		goto drop;
 	}
 
+	rcu_read_lock();
+
+	if (unlikely(!(vxlan->dev->flags & IFF_UP))) {
+		rcu_read_unlock();
+		atomic_long_inc(&vxlan->dev->rx_dropped);
+		goto drop;
+	}
+
 	stats = this_cpu_ptr(vxlan->dev->tstats);
 	u64_stats_update_begin(&stats->syncp);
 	stats->rx_packets++;
@@ -1545,6 +1553,9 @@ static int vxlan_rcv(struct sock *sk, st
 	u64_stats_update_end(&stats->syncp);
 
 	gro_cells_receive(&vxlan->gro_cells, skb);
+
+	rcu_read_unlock();
+
 	return 0;
 
 drop: