linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] KVM: x86: Fix stack-out-of-bounds memory access from ioapic_write

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: <87h7fej5ov.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Aug 2021 10:21:04 +0200
From:   Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
To:     Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>,
        Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] KVM: x86: Fix stack-out-of-bounds memory access
 from ioapic_write_indirect()

Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com> writes:

> On Tue, 2021-08-24 at 16:42 +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
...
>
> Not a classical review but,
> I did some digital archaeology with this one, trying to understand what is going on:
>
>
> I think that 16 bit vcpu bitmap is due to the fact that IOAPIC spec states that
> it can address up to 16 cpus in physical destination mode.
>  
> In logical destination mode, assuming flat addressing and that logical id = 1 << physical id
> which KVM hardcodes, it is also only possible to address 8 CPUs.
>  
> However(!) in flat cluster mode, the logical apic id is split in two.
> We have 16 clusters and each have 4 CPUs, so it is possible to address 64 CPUs,
> and unlike the logical ID, the KVM does honour cluster ID, 
> thus one can stick say cluster ID 0 to any vCPU.
>  
>  
> Let's look at ioapic_write_indirect.
> It does:
>  
>     -> bitmap_zero(&vcpu_bitmap, 16);
>     -> kvm_bitmap_or_dest_vcpus(ioapic->kvm, &irq, &vcpu_bitmap);
>     -> kvm_make_scan_ioapic_request_mask(ioapic->kvm, &vcpu_bitmap); // use of the above bitmap
>  
>  
> When we call kvm_bitmap_or_dest_vcpus, we can already overflow the bitmap,
> since we pass all 8 bit of the destination even when it is physical.
>  
>  
> Lets examine the kvm_bitmap_or_dest_vcpus:
>  
>   -> It calls the kvm_apic_map_get_dest_lapic which 
>  
>        -> for physical destinations, it just sets the bitmap, which can overflow
>           if we pass it 8 bit destination (which basically includes reserved bits + 4 bit destination).
>  
>  
>        -> For logical apic ID, it seems to truncate the result to 16 bit, which isn't correct as I explained
>           above, but should not overflow the result.
>  
>   
>    -> If call to kvm_apic_map_get_dest_lapic fails, it goes over all vcpus and tries to match the destination
>        This can overflow as well.
>  
>  
> I also don't like that ioapic_write_indirect calls the kvm_bitmap_or_dest_vcpus twice,
> and second time with 'old_dest_id'
>  
> I am not 100%  sure why old_dest_id/old_dest_mode are needed as I don't see anything in the
> function changing them.
> I think only the guest can change them, so maybe the code deals with the guest changing them
> while the code is running from a different vcpu?
>  
> The commit that introduced this code is 7ee30bc132c683d06a6d9e360e39e483e3990708
> Nitesh Narayan Lal, maybe you remember something about it?
>  

Before posting this patch I've contacted Nitesh privately, he's
currently on vacation but will take a look when he gets back.

>
> Also I worry a lot about other callers of kvm_apic_map_get_dest_lapic
>  
> It is also called from kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic_fast, and from kvm_intr_is_single_vcpu_fast
> and both seem to also use 'unsigned long' for bitmap, and then only use 16 bits of it.
>  
> I haven't dug into them, but these don't seem to be IOAPIC related and I think
> can overwrite the stack as well.

I'm no expert in this code but when writing the patch I somehow
convinced myself that a single unsigned long is always enough. I think
that for cluster mode 'bitmap' needs 64-bits (and it is *not* a
vcpu_bitmap, we need to convert). I may be completely wrong of course
but in any case this is a different issue. In ioapic_write_indirect() we
have 'vcpu_bitmap' which should certainly be longer than 64 bits.

-- 
Vitaly