linux-kernel - Re: possible deadlock in rfcomm_sk_state

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:   Mon, 29 Aug 2022 23:48:01 -0700
From:   Desmond Cheong Zhi Xi <desmondcheongzx@...il.com>
To:     Jiacheng Xu <578001344xu@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, marcel@...tmann.org,
        johan.hedberg@...il.com, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        luiz.dentz@...il.com, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: possible deadlock in rfcomm_sk_state_change

+cc Bluetooth and Networking maintainers

Hi Jiacheng,

On 28/8/22 04:03, Jiacheng Xu wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I believe the deadlock is more than possible but actually real.
> I got a poc that could stably trigger the deadlock.
> 
> poc: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PjqvMtHsrrGM1MIRGKl_zJGR-teAMMQy/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Description/Root cause:
> In rfcomm_sock_shutdown(), lock_sock() is called when releasing and
> shutting down socket.
> However, lock_sock() has to be called once more when the sk_state is
> changed because the
> lock is not always held when rfcomm_sk_state_change() is called. One
> such call stack is:
> 
>    rfcomm_sock_shutdown():
>      lock_sock();
>      __rfcomm_sock_close():
>        rfcomm_dlc_close():
>          __rfcomm_dlc_close():
>            rfcomm_dlc_lock();
>            rfcomm_sk_state_change():
>              lock_sock();
> 
> Besides the recursive deadlock, there is also an
> issue of a lock hierarchy inversion between rfcomm_dlc_lock() and
> lock_sock() if the socket is locked in rfcomm_sk_state_change().


Thanks for the poc and for following the trail all the way to the root 
cause - this was a known issue and I didn't realize the patch wasn't 
applied.

>  > Reference: 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211004180734.434511-1-desmondcheongzx@gmail.com/
> 

Fwiw, I tested the patch again with syzbot. It still applies cleanly to 
the head of bluetooth-next and seems to address the root cause.

Any thoughts from the maintainers on this issue and the proposed fix?

Best,
Desmond