| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CANpmjNPDSqokrHHVGkKHBFRe379xWUsF9CpECK=Eas375Wjj_A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2021 11:34:54 +0200
From: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To: Kuan-Ying Lee <Kuan-Ying.Lee@...iatek.com>
Cc: Nicholas Tang <nicholas.tang@...iatek.com>,
Andrew Yang <andrew.yang@...iatek.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Chinwen Chang <chinwen.chang@...iatek.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kasan, mm: reset tag when access metadata
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 10:32, Kuan-Ying Lee <Kuan-Ying.Lee@...iatek.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2021-07-27 at 09:10 +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> > +Cc Catalin
> >
> > On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 at 06:00, Kuan-Ying Lee <
> > Kuan-Ying.Lee@...iatek.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hardware tag-based KASAN doesn't use compiler instrumentation, we
> > > can not use kasan_disable_current() to ignore tag check.
> > >
> > > Thus, we need to reset tags when accessing metadata.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Kuan-Ying Lee <Kuan-Ying.Lee@...iatek.com>
> >
> > This looks reasonable, but the patch title is not saying this is
> > kmemleak, nor does the description say what the problem is. What
> > problem did you encounter? Was it a false positive?
>
> kmemleak would scan kernel memory to check memory leak.
> When it scans on the invalid slab and dereference, the issue
> will occur like below.
Please also add this info to commit message.
> So I think we should reset the tag before scanning.
>
> # echo scan > /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak
> [ 151.905804]
> ==================================================================
> [ 151.907120] BUG: KASAN: out-of-bounds in scan_block+0x58/0x170
> [ 151.908773] Read at addr f7ff0000c0074eb0 by task kmemleak/138
> [ 151.909656] Pointer tag: [f7], memory tag: [fe]
> [ 151.910195]
> [ 151.910876] CPU: 7 PID: 138 Comm: kmemleak Not tainted 5.14.0-rc2-
> 00001-g8cae8cd89f05-dirty #134
> [ 151.912085] Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT)
> [ 151.912868] Call trace:
> [ 151.913211] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x1b0
> [ 151.913796] show_stack+0x1c/0x30
> [ 151.914248] dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x84
> [ 151.914778] print_address_description+0x7c/0x2b4
> [ 151.915340] kasan_report+0x138/0x38c
> [ 151.915804] __do_kernel_fault+0x190/0x1c4
> [ 151.916386] do_tag_check_fault+0x78/0x90
> [ 151.916856] do_mem_abort+0x44/0xb4
> [ 151.917308] el1_abort+0x40/0x60
> [ 151.917754] el1h_64_sync_handler+0xb4/0xd0
> [ 151.918270] el1h_64_sync+0x78/0x7c
> [ 151.918714] scan_block+0x58/0x170
> [ 151.919157] scan_gray_list+0xdc/0x1a0
> [ 151.919626] kmemleak_scan+0x2ac/0x560
> [ 151.920129] kmemleak_scan_thread+0xb0/0xe0
> [ 151.920635] kthread+0x154/0x160
> [ 151.921115] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
> [ 151.921717]
> [ 151.922077] Allocated by task 0:
> [ 151.922523] kasan_save_stack+0x2c/0x60
> [ 151.923099] __kasan_kmalloc+0xec/0x104
> [ 151.923502] __kmalloc+0x224/0x3c4
> [ 151.924172] __register_sysctl_paths+0x200/0x290
> [ 151.924709] register_sysctl_table+0x2c/0x40
> [ 151.925175] sysctl_init+0x20/0x34
> [ 151.925665] proc_sys_init+0x3c/0x48
> [ 151.926136] proc_root_init+0x80/0x9c
> [ 151.926547] start_kernel+0x648/0x6a4
> [ 151.926987] __primary_switched+0xc0/0xc8
> [ 151.927557]
> [ 151.927994] Freed by task 0:
> [ 151.928340] kasan_save_stack+0x2c/0x60
> [ 151.928766] kasan_set_track+0x2c/0x40
> [ 151.929173] kasan_set_free_info+0x44/0x54
> [ 151.929568] ____kasan_slab_free.constprop.0+0x150/0x1b0
> [ 151.930063] __kasan_slab_free+0x14/0x20
> [ 151.930449] slab_free_freelist_hook+0xa4/0x1fc
> [ 151.930924] kfree+0x1e8/0x30c
> [ 151.931285] put_fs_context+0x124/0x220
> [ 151.931731] vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x60/0xd4
> [ 151.932280] kern_mount+0x24/0x4c
> [ 151.932686] bdev_cache_init+0x70/0x9c
> [ 151.933122] vfs_caches_init+0xdc/0xf4
> [ 151.933578] start_kernel+0x638/0x6a4
> [ 151.934014] __primary_switched+0xc0/0xc8
> [ 151.934478]
> [ 151.934757] The buggy address belongs to the object at
> ffff0000c0074e00
> [ 151.934757] which belongs to the cache kmalloc-256 of size 256
> [ 151.935744] The buggy address is located 176 bytes inside of
> [ 151.935744] 256-byte region [ffff0000c0074e00, ffff0000c0074f00)
> [ 151.936702] The buggy address belongs to the page:
> [ 151.937378] page:(____ptrval____) refcount:1 mapcount:0
> mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x100074
> [ 151.938682] head:(____ptrval____) order:2 compound_mapcount:0
> compound_pincount:0
> [ 151.939440] flags:
> 0xbfffc0000010200(slab|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0xffff|kasantag=0x
> 0)
> [ 151.940886] raw: 0bfffc0000010200 0000000000000000 dead000000000122
> f5ff0000c0002300
> [ 151.941634] raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000200020 00000001ffffffff
> 0000000000000000
> [ 151.942353] page dumped because: kasan: bad access detected
> [ 151.942923]
> [ 151.943214] Memory state around the buggy address:
> [ 151.943896] ffff0000c0074c00: f0 f0 f0 f0 f0 f0 f0 f0 f0 fe fe fe
> fe fe fe fe
> [ 151.944857] ffff0000c0074d00: fe fe fe fe fe fe fe fe fe fe fe fe
> fe fe fe fe
> [ 151.945892] >ffff0000c0074e00: f7 f7 f7 f7 f7 f7 f7 f7 f7 f7 f7 fe
> fe fe fe fe
> [ 151.946407] ^
> [ 151.946939] ffff0000c0074f00: fe fe fe fe fe fe fe fe fe fe fe fe
> fe fe fe fe
> [ 151.947445] ffff0000c0075000: fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb fb
> fb fb fb fb
> [ 151.947999]
> ==================================================================
> [ 151.948524] Disabling lock debugging due to kernel taint
> [ 156.434569] kmemleak: 181 new suspected memory leaks (see
> /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak)
>
> >
> > Perhaps this should have been "kmemleak, kasan: reset pointer tags to
> > avoid false positives" ?
>
> Thanks for the suggestions.
> But I think it doesn't belong to false
> positive becuase scan block
> touched invalid metadata certainly.
It's how kmemleak works, so we knowingly access invalid memory, and
for all intents and purposes it's a false positive.
> Maybe "kmemleak, kasan: reset tags when scanning block"?
That's fine.
Thanks,
-- Marco
Powered by blists - more mailing lists