linux-kernel - Re: Regression in 5.1.20: Reading long directory fails

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: <1ebf86cff330eb15c02249f0dac415a8aff99f49.camel@hammerspace.com>
Date:   Sun, 8 Sep 2019 15:19:40 +0000
From:   Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>
To:     "bcodding@...hat.com" <bcodding@...hat.com>,
        "chuck.lever@...cle.com" <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
CC:     "tibbs@...h.uh.edu" <tibbs@...h.uh.edu>,
        "bfields@...ldses.org" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
        "linux@...m.de" <linux@...m.de>,
        "linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "km@...all.com" <km@...all.com>
Subject: Re: Regression in 5.1.20: Reading long directory fails

On Sun, 2019-09-08 at 07:39 -0400, Benjamin Coddington wrote:
> On 6 Sep 2019, at 16:50, Chuck Lever wrote:
> 
> > > On Sep 6, 2019, at 4:47 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III <
> > > tibbs@...h.uh.edu> 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > > > > "JBF" == J Bruce Fields <bfields@...ldses.org> writes:
> > > 
> > > JBF> Those readdir changes were client-side, right?  Based on
> > > that 
> > > I'd
> > > JBF> been assuming a client bug, but maybe it'd be worth getting
> > > a 
> > > full
> > > JBF> packet capture of the readdir reply to make sure it's legit.
> > > 
> > > I have been working with bcodding on IRC for the past couple of
> > > days 
> > > on
> > > this.  Fortunately I was able to come up with way to fill up a 
> > > directory
> > > in such a way that it will fail with certainty and as a bonus
> > > doesn't
> > > include any user data so I can feel OK about sharing packet
> > > captures. 
> > >  I
> > > have a capture alongside a kernel trace of the problematic
> > > operation 
> > > in
> > > https://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/nfs/.  Not that I can
> > > particularly 
> > > tell
> > > anything useful from that, but bcodding says that it seems to
> > > point 
> > > to
> > > some issue in sunrpc.
> > > 
> > > And because I can easily reproduce this and I was able to do a 
> > > bisect:
> > > 
> > > 2c94b8eca1a26cd46010d6e73a23da5f2e93a19d is the first bad commit
> > > commit 2c94b8eca1a26cd46010d6e73a23da5f2e93a19d
> > > Author: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
> > > Date:   Mon Feb 11 11:25:41 2019 -0500
> > > 
> > >    SUNRPC: Use au_rslack when computing reply buffer size
> > > 
> > >    au_rslack is significantly smaller than (au_cslack << 2).
> > > Using
> > >    that value results in smaller receive buffers. In some cases
> > > this
> > >    eliminates an extra segment in Reply chunks (RPC/RDMA).
> > > 
> > >    Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
> > >    Signed-off-by: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@...app.com>
> > > 
> > > :040000 040000 d4d1ce2fbe0035c5bd9df976b8c448df85dcb505 
> > > 7011a792dfe72ff9cd70d66e45d353f3d7817e3e M      net
> > > 
> > > But of course, I can't say whether this is the actual bad commit
> > > or
> > > whether it just introduced a behavior change which alters the 
> > > conditions
> > > under which the problem appears.
> > 
> > The first place I'd start looking is the XDR constants at the head
> > of 
> > fs/nfs/nfs4xdr.c
> > having to do with READDIR.
> > 
> > The report of behavior changes with the use of krb5p also makes
> > this 
> > commit plausible.
> 
> After sprinkling the printk's, we're coming up one word short in the 
> receive
> buffer.  I think we're not accounting for the xdr pad of buf->pages
> for 
> NFS4
> readdir -- but I need to check the RFCs.  Anyone know if v4 READDIR 
> results
> have to be aligned?
> 
> Also need to check just why krb5i is the only auth that cares..
> 

I'm not seeing that. If you look at commit 02ef04e432ba, you'll see
that Chuck did add a 'padding term' to decode_readdir_maxsz in the
NFSv4 case.
The other thing to remember is that a readdir 'dirlist4' entry is
always word aligned (irrespective of the length of the filename), so
there is no padding that needs to be taken into account.

I think we probably rather want to look at how auth->au_ralign is being
calculated for the case of krb5i. I'm really not understanding why
auth->au_ralign should not take into account the presence of the mic.
Chuck?


-- 
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
trond.myklebust@...merspace.com