linux-kernel - Re: kernel BUG at net/core/net-sysfs.c:LINE!

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: <20190325185554.GA97916@dtor-ws>
Date:   Mon, 25 Mar 2019 11:55:54 -0700
From:   Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     "wanghai (M)" <wanghai26@...wei.com>,
        syzbot <syzbot+6024817a931b2830bc93@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, amritha.nambiar@...el.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, f.fainelli@...il.com, idosch@...lanox.com,
        joe@...ches.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, stephen@...workplumber.org,
        syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, tyhicks@...onical.com,
        yuehaibing@...wei.com
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at net/core/net-sysfs.c:LINE!

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 06:10:31PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 11:20:01PM +0800, wanghai (M) wrote:
> > thanks , Can it be fixed like this?
> 
> I dunno. I think no, it can't.

I agree, it can't.

> 
> As far as I can see the issue happened due to freeing entire network device at
> the point of putting reference count to the device (struct device is embedded
> into struct net_device).
> 
> When it happens the access to _any_ field of struct net_device will crash the
> system.
> 
> Basically it means that put_device() should be carefully placed case-by-case,
> because on real hardware the actual device is parent and usually no-one does
> access to the child without need. On the contrary the tunX devices are
> artificial and are controlled by the network stack.
> 
> So, it means we need to do something like
> 
> ret = register_netdev(...);
> if (ret) {
> 	put_device(&ndev->dev);
> 	...
> }
> 
> But as I mentioned, it would be tricky to not break something else.

I'd say that the entity that called alloc_netdev() should be the one
that calls put_device() (but the way of free_netdev()), not net/core
code. Do we have a driver that is messed up and does not do proper
cleanup?

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry