[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <285a8ede-c901-7d8c-bd3a-e9ce8962e714@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:31:50 -0600
From: Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: syzbot+36315852ece4132ec193@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...nel.org>,
jfs-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] JFS: more checks for invalid superblock
Thanks! This looks good and reasonable. I'll try to get it pushed out to
-next in the next few days.
Shaggy
On 12/18/20 2:17 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> syzbot is feeding invalid superblock data to JFS for mount testing.
> JFS does not check several of the fields -- just assumes that they
> are good since the JFS_MAGIC and version fields are good.
>
> In this case (syzbot reproducer), we have s_l2bsize == 0xda0c,
> pad == 0xf045, and s_state == 0x50, all of which are invalid IMO.
> Having s_l2bsize == 0xda0c causes this UBSAN warning:
> UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in fs/jfs/jfs_mount.c:373:25
> shift exponent -9716 is negative
>
> s_l2bsize can be tested for correctness. pad can be tested for non-0
> and punted. s_state can be tested for its valid values and punted.
>
> Do those 3 tests and if any of them fails, report the superblock as
> invalid/corrupt and let fsck handle it.
>
> With this patch, chkSuper() says this when JFS_DEBUG is enabled:
> jfs_mount: Mount Failure: superblock is corrupt!
> Mount JFS Failure: -22
> jfs_mount failed w/return code = -22
>
> The obvious problem with this method is that next week there could
> be another syzbot test that uses different fields for invalid values,
> this making this like a game of whack-a-mole.
>
> syzkaller link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=36315852ece4132ec193
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+36315852ece4132ec193@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com> # v2
> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> Cc: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...nel.org>
> Cc: jfs-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net
> ---
> v2: fix sparse __le32 warning (lkp robot)
>
> fs/jfs/jfs_filsys.h | 1 +
> fs/jfs/jfs_mount.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+)
>
> --- lnx-510.orig/fs/jfs/jfs_mount.c
> +++ lnx-510/fs/jfs/jfs_mount.c
> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@
> #include <linux/fs.h>
> #include <linux/buffer_head.h>
> #include <linux/blkdev.h>
> +#include <linux/log2.h>
>
> #include "jfs_incore.h"
> #include "jfs_filsys.h"
> @@ -366,6 +367,15 @@ static int chkSuper(struct super_block *
> sbi->bsize = bsize;
> sbi->l2bsize = le16_to_cpu(j_sb->s_l2bsize);
>
> + /* check some fields for possible corruption */
> + if (sbi->l2bsize != ilog2((u32)bsize) ||
> + j_sb->pad != 0 ||
> + le32_to_cpu(j_sb->s_state) > FM_STATE_MAX) {
> + rc = -EINVAL;
> + jfs_err("jfs_mount: Mount Failure: superblock is corrupt!");
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> /*
> * For now, ignore s_pbsize, l2bfactor. All I/O going through buffer
> * cache.
> --- lnx-510.orig/fs/jfs/jfs_filsys.h
> +++ lnx-510/fs/jfs/jfs_filsys.h
> @@ -268,5 +268,6 @@
> * fsck() must be run to repair
> */
> #define FM_EXTENDFS 0x00000008 /* file system extendfs() in progress */
> +#define FM_STATE_MAX 0x0000000f /* max value of s_state */
>
> #endif /* _H_JFS_FILSYS */
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists