linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] IB/sa: Resolving use-after-free in ib_nl_send

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 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]

Date:   Wed, 17 Jun 2020 15:23:00 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Divya Indi <divya.indi@...cle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, Kaike Wan <kaike.wan@...el.com>,
        Gerd Rausch <gerd.rausch@...cle.com>,
        Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@...cle.com>,
        Srinivas Eeda <srinivas.eeda@...cle.com>,
        Rama Nichanamatlu <rama.nichanamatlu@...cle.com>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] IB/sa: Resolving use-after-free in ib_nl_send_msg

On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 08:17:39AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> 
> My thoughts that everything here hints me that state machine and
> locking are implemented wrongly. In ideal world, the expectation
> is that REQ message will have a state in it (PREPARED, SENT, ACK
> e.t.c.) and list manipulations are done accordingly with proper
> locks, while rdma_nl_multicast() is done outside of the locks.

It can't be done outside the lock without creating races - once
rdma_nl_multicast happens it is possible for the other leg of the
operation to begin processing. 

The list must be updated before this happens.

What is missing here is refcounting - the lifetime model of this data
is too implicit, but it is not worth adding I think

Jason