linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.8 45/56] wireguard: peerlookup: take lock before checking hash in replace operation

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: <20200925124734.595394645@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 25 Sep 2020 14:48:35 +0200
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>,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [PATCH 5.8 45/56] wireguard: peerlookup: take lock before checking hash in replace operation

From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>

[ Upstream commit 6147f7b1e90ff09bd52afc8b9206a7fcd133daf7 ]

Eric's suggested fix for the previous commit's mentioned race condition
was to simply take the table->lock in wg_index_hashtable_replace(). The
table->lock of the hash table is supposed to protect the bucket heads,
not the entires, but actually, since all the mutator functions are
already taking it, it makes sense to take it too for the test to
hlist_unhashed, as a defense in depth measure, so that it no longer
races with deletions, regardless of what other locks are protecting
individual entries. This is sensible from a performance perspective
because, as Eric pointed out, the case of being unhashed is already the
unlikely case, so this won't add common contention. And comparing
instructions, this basically doesn't make much of a difference other
than pushing and popping %r13, used by the new `bool ret`. More
generally, I like the idea of locking consistency across table mutator
functions, and this might let me rest slightly easier at night.

Suggested-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/wireguard/20200908145911.4090480-1-edumazet@google.com/
Fixes: e7096c131e51 ("net: WireGuard secure network tunnel")
Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 drivers/net/wireguard/peerlookup.c |   11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/net/wireguard/peerlookup.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireguard/peerlookup.c
@@ -167,9 +167,13 @@ bool wg_index_hashtable_replace(struct i
 				struct index_hashtable_entry *old,
 				struct index_hashtable_entry *new)
 {
-	if (unlikely(hlist_unhashed(&old->index_hash)))
-		return false;
+	bool ret;
+
 	spin_lock_bh(&table->lock);
+	ret = !hlist_unhashed(&old->index_hash);
+	if (unlikely(!ret))
+		goto out;
+
 	new->index = old->index;
 	hlist_replace_rcu(&old->index_hash, &new->index_hash);

@@ -180,8 +184,9 @@ bool wg_index_hashtable_replace(struct i
 	 * simply gets dropped, which isn't terrible.
 	 */
 	INIT_HLIST_NODE(&old->index_hash);
+out:
 	spin_unlock_bh(&table->lock);
-	return true;
+	return ret;
 }

 void wg_index_hashtable_remove(struct index_hashtable *table,