linux-kernel - Re: 回复: 回复: [PATCH] io-wq: Fix UAF when wakeup wqe in hash waitqueue

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: <9af68623-57e4-cef0-bb61-347207fb0c45@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 7 Jun 2021 18:38:34 +0100
From:   Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To:     "Zhang, Qiang" <Qiang.Zhang@...driver.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>,
        "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     "syzbot+6cb11ade52aa17095297@...kaller.appspotmail.com" 
        <syzbot+6cb11ade52aa17095297@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        "io-uring@...r.kernel.org" <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 回复: 回复: [PATCH] io-wq: Fix UAF when wakeup wqe in hash waitqueue

On 5/25/21 3:01 AM, Zhang, Qiang wrote:
[...]
>> Haven't looked at the trace and description, but I do think
>> there is a problem it solves.
>>
>> 1) io_wait_on_hash() -> __add_wait_queue(&hash->wait, &wqe->wait);
>> 2) (note: wqe is a worker) wqe's workers exit dropping refs
>> 3) refs are zero, free io-wq
>> 4) @hash is shared, so other task/wq does wake_up(&wq->hash->wait);
>> 5) it wakes freed wqe
>>
>> step 4) is a bit more trickier than that, tl;dr;
>> wq3:worker1     | locks bit1
>> wq1:worker2     | waits bit1
>> wq2:worker1     | waits bit1
>> wq1:worker3     | waits bit1
>>
>> wq3:worker1     | drop  bit1
>> wq1:worker2     | locks bit1
>> wq1:worker2     | completes all wq1 bit1 work items
>> wq1:worker2     | drop  bit1, exit and free io-wq
>>
>> wq2:worker1     | locks bit1
>> wq1             | free complete
>> wq2:worker1     | drops bit1
>> wq1:worker3     | waked up, even though freed
>>
>> Can be simplified, don't want to waste time on that
> 
> Thanks Pavel
> 
> Your description is better.  I have another question: under what circumstances will three io-wq(wq1, wq2, wq3) be created to share this @hash?

Oops, missed the email. It's created by io_uring, and passed to
io-wq, which is per-task and created on demand by io_uring.

Can be achieved by a snippet just below, where threads
haven't had io_uring instances before.

thread1: ring = create_io_uring();
thread2: submit_sqes(ring);
thread3: submit_sqes(ring);

> 
> This kind of problem also occurs between two io-wq(wq1, wq2). Is the following description OK？

Yep, and I feel like there are cases simpler (and
more likely) than the one I described.

> 
> wq1:worker2     | locks bit1
> wq2:worker1     | waits bit1
> wq1:worker3     | waits bit1
> 
> wq1:worker2     | completes all wq1 bit1 work items
> wq1:worker2     | drop  bit1, exit and free io-wq
> 
> wq2:worker1     | locks bit1
> wq1                       | free complete
> wq2:worker1     | drops bit1
> wq1:worker3     | waked up, even though freed


-- 
Pavel Begunkov