linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net] net/smc: Avoid setting clcsock options after clcsock released

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 12 Jan 2022 15:11:34 +0800
From:   "dust.li" <dust.li@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>, kgraul@...ux.ibm.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net/smc: Avoid setting clcsock options after clcsock
 released

On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 05:38:25PM +0800, Wen Gu wrote:
>We encountered a crash in smc_setsockopt() and it is caused by
>accessing smc->clcsock after clcsock was released.
>
> BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000020
> #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode
> #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page
> PGD 0 P4D 0
> Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI
> CPU: 1 PID: 50309 Comm: nginx Kdump: loaded Tainted: G E     5.16.0-rc4+ #53
> RIP: 0010:smc_setsockopt+0x59/0x280 [smc]
> Call Trace:
>  <TASK>
>  __sys_setsockopt+0xfc/0x190
>  __x64_sys_setsockopt+0x20/0x30
>  do_syscall_64+0x34/0x90
>  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
> RIP: 0033:0x7f16ba83918e
>  </TASK>
>
>This patch tries to fix it by holding clcsock_release_lock and
>checking whether clcsock has already been released. In case that
>a crash of the same reason happens in smc_getsockopt(), this patch
>also checkes smc->clcsock in smc_getsockopt().
>
>Signed-off-by: Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>
>---
> net/smc/af_smc.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c
>index 1c9289f..af423f4 100644
>--- a/net/smc/af_smc.c
>+++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c
>@@ -2441,6 +2441,11 @@ static int smc_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
> 	/* generic setsockopts reaching us here always apply to the
> 	 * CLC socket
> 	 */
>+	mutex_lock(&smc->clcsock_release_lock);
>+	if (!smc->clcsock) {
>+		mutex_unlock(&smc->clcsock_release_lock);
>+		return -EBADF;
>+	}
> 	if (unlikely(!smc->clcsock->ops->setsockopt))
> 		rc = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> 	else
>@@ -2450,6 +2455,7 @@ static int smc_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
> 		sk->sk_err = smc->clcsock->sk->sk_err;
> 		sk_error_report(sk);
> 	}
>+	mutex_unlock(&smc->clcsock_release_lock);
> 
> 	if (optlen < sizeof(int))
> 		return -EINVAL;
>@@ -2509,13 +2515,21 @@ static int smc_getsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
> 			  char __user *optval, int __user *optlen)
> {
> 	struct smc_sock *smc;
>+	int rc;
> 
> 	smc = smc_sk(sock->sk);
>+	mutex_lock(&smc->clcsock_release_lock);
>+	if (!smc->clcsock) {
>+		mutex_unlock(&smc->clcsock_release_lock);
>+		return -EBADF;
>+	}
> 	/* socket options apply to the CLC socket */
> 	if (unlikely(!smc->clcsock->ops->getsockopt))
Missed a mutex_unlock() here ?

> 		return -EOPNOTSUPP;

>-	return smc->clcsock->ops->getsockopt(smc->clcsock, level, optname,
>+	rc = smc->clcsock->ops->getsockopt(smc->clcsock, level, optname,
> 					     optval, optlen);
>+	mutex_unlock(&smc->clcsock_release_lock);
>+	return rc;
> }
> 
> static int smc_ioctl(struct socket *sock, unsigned int cmd,
>-- 
>1.8.3.1