linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] HID: mcp-2221: prevent UAF in delayed work

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230215171538.dnpl2gbwb77ffurf@mail.corp.redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Feb 2023 18:15:38 +0100
From:   Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
To:     Rishi Gupta <gupt21@...il.com>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Pietro Borrello <borrello@...g.uniroma1.it>,
        linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: mcp-2221: prevent UAF in delayed work

On Feb 15 2023, Benjamin Tissoires via B4 Submission Endpoint wrote:
> From: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
> 
> If the device is plugged/unplugged without giving time for mcp_init_work()
> to complete, we might kick in the devm free code path and thus have
> unavailable struct mcp_2221 while in delayed work.
> 
> Add a boolean and a spinlock to prevent scheduling the deleyed work if
> we are in the operation of removing the device.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
> ---
> Similar to Pietro's series, we can see the pattern in hid-mcp2221,
> except that this time the ledclass is not involved.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-input/20230125-hid-unregister-leds-v4-5-7860c5763c38@diag.uniroma1.it/
> ---
>  drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c b/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c
> index e61dd039354b..de8b988f4a48 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c
> @@ -95,6 +95,8 @@ struct mcp2221 {
>  	struct mutex lock;
>  	struct completion wait_in_report;
>  	struct delayed_work init_work;
> +	spinlock_t init_work_lock;
> +	bool removing;
>  	u8 *rxbuf;
>  	u8 txbuf[64];
>  	int rxbuf_idx;
> @@ -922,6 +924,14 @@ static void mcp2221_hid_unregister(void *ptr)
>  /* This is needed to be sure hid_hw_stop() isn't called twice by the subsystem */
>  static void mcp2221_remove(struct hid_device *hdev)
>  {
> +	struct mcp2221 *mcp = hid_get_drvdata(hdev);
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&mcp->init_work_lock, flags);
> +	mcp->removing = true;
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mcp->init_work_lock, flags);
> +
> +	cancel_delayed_work_sync(&mcp->init_work);

Actually, given that the only re-submission of this work is from the
work item itself, I wonder if I really need the boolean and the
spinlock. cancel_delayed_work_sync() might already prevent a
resubmission by itself as it does in cancel_work_sync().

Cheers,
Benjamin

>  }
>  
>  #if IS_REACHABLE(CONFIG_IIO)
> @@ -1040,6 +1050,7 @@ static void mcp_init_work(struct work_struct *work)
>  	struct mcp2221_iio *data;
>  	static int retries = 5;
>  	int ret, num_channels;
> +	unsigned long flags;
>  
>  	hid_hw_power(mcp->hdev, PM_HINT_FULLON);
>  	mutex_lock(&mcp->lock);
> @@ -1090,7 +1101,10 @@ static void mcp_init_work(struct work_struct *work)
>  		return;
>  
>  	/* Device is not ready to read SRAM or FLASH data, try again */
> -	schedule_delayed_work(&mcp->init_work, msecs_to_jiffies(100));
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&mcp->init_work_lock, flags);
> +	if (!mcp->removing)
> +		schedule_delayed_work(&mcp->init_work, msecs_to_jiffies(100));
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mcp->init_work_lock, flags);
>  }
>  #endif
>  
> @@ -1131,6 +1145,7 @@ static int mcp2221_probe(struct hid_device *hdev,
>  	}
>  
>  	mutex_init(&mcp->lock);
> +	spin_lock_init(&mcp->init_work_lock);
>  	init_completion(&mcp->wait_in_report);
>  	hid_set_drvdata(hdev, mcp);
>  	mcp->hdev = hdev;
> 
> ---
> base-commit: d883fd110dc17308a1506c5bf17e00ce9fe7b2a2
> change-id: 20230215-wip-mcp2221-979d4115efb5
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
>