linux-kernel - Re: Linux 5.1-rc5

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: <87sguhti6e.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Date:   Wed, 17 Apr 2019 13:38:33 +1000
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...abs.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.1-rc5

[ Cc += Nick & Aneesh & Paul ]

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
>>
>> Can we please have the page refcount overflow fixes out on the list
>> for review, even if it is after the fact?
>
> They were actually on a list for review long before the fact, but it
> was the security mailing list. The issue actually got discussed back
> in January along with early versions of the patches, but then we
> dropped the ball because it just wasn't on anybody's radar and it got
> resurrected late March. Willy wrote a rather bigger patch-series, and
> review of that is what then resulted in those commits. So they may
> look recent, but that's just because the original patches got
> seriously edited down and rewritten.
>
> That said, powerpc and s390 should at least look at maybe adding a
> check for the page ref in their gup paths too. Powerpc has the special
> gup_hugepte() case

Which uses page_cache_add_speculative(), which handles the case of the
refcount being zero but not overflow. So that looks like it needs
fixing.

We also have follow_huge_pd() that should use try_get_page().

And we have a few uses of bare get_page() in KVM code which might be
subject to the same attack.

cheers