linux-kernel - [PATCH] x86: Pin task-stack in __get

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: <YZduix64h64cDa7R@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Fri, 19 Nov 2021 10:29:47 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Holger Hoffst??tte <holger@...lied-asynchrony.com>,
        Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, patches@...nelci.org,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>,
        Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] x86: Pin task-stack in __get_wchan()

On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 06:04:27PM -0800, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 01:11:09PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > I now have the below, the only thing missing is that there's a
> > user_mode() call on a stack based regs. Now on x86_64 we can
> > __get_kernel_nofault() regs->cs and call it a day, but on i386 we have
> > to also fetch regs->flags.
> > 
> > Is this really the way to go?
> 
> Please no.  Can we just add a check in unwind_start() to ensure the
> caller did try_get_task_stack()?

I tried; but at best it's fundamentally racy and in practise its worse
because init_task doesn't seem to believe in refcounts and kthreads are
odd for some raisin. Now those are fixable, but given the fundamental
races, I don't see how it's ever going to be reliable.

I don't mind the __get_kernel_nofault() usage and think I can do a
better implementation that will allow us to get rid of the
pagefault_{dis,en}able() sprinkling, but that's for another day. It's
just the user_mode(regs) usage that's going to be somewhat ugleh.

Anyway, below is the minimal fix for the situation at hand. I'm not
going to be around much today, so if Linus wants to pick that up instead
of mass revert things that's obviously fine too.

---
Subject: x86: Pin task-stack in __get_wchan()

When commit 5d1ceb3969b6 ("x86: Fix __get_wchan() for !STACKTRACE")
moved from stacktrace to native unwind_*() usage, the
try_get_task_stack() got lost, leading to use-after-free issues for
dying tasks.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/process.c | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
index e9ee8b526319..04143a653a8a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
@@ -964,6 +964,9 @@ unsigned long __get_wchan(struct task_struct *p)
 	struct unwind_state state;
 	unsigned long addr = 0;
 
+	if (!try_get_task_stack(p))
+		return 0;
+
 	for (unwind_start(&state, p, NULL, NULL); !unwind_done(&state);
 	     unwind_next_frame(&state)) {
 		addr = unwind_get_return_address(&state);
@@ -974,6 +977,8 @@ unsigned long __get_wchan(struct task_struct *p)
 		break;
 	}
 
+	put_task_stack(p);
+
 	return addr;
 }