[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <80235479-e410-845b-2e78-75f6a234b740@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2023 10:48:31 +0200
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
To: "Dae R. Jeong" <threeearcat@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
duoming@....edu.cn, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: KASAN: use-after-free Read in slip_ioctl
Hi,
On 25. 03. 23, 9:18, Dae R. Jeong wrote:
> We observed a use-after-free in slip_ioctl as attached at the end.
>
> Although I'm not sure that our analysis is correct, it seems that the
> concurrent execution of slip_ioctl() and slip_close() causes the issue
> as follows.
>
> CPU1 CPU2
> slip_ioctl slip_close (via slip_hangup)
> ----- -----
> // Read a non-null value
> sl = tty->disc_data;
> // Nullify tty->disc_data and then
> // unregister sl->dev
> rcu_assign_pointer(tty->disc_data, NULL);
> unregister_netdev(sl->dev);
> // sl is freed in unregister_netdev()
> if (!sl || sl->magic != SLIP_MAGIC)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> I suspect that the two functions can be executed concurrently as I
> don't see a locking mechanism to prevent this in tty_ioctl(), and that
> sl is freed in unregister_netdev() as explained in the callstack. But
> still we need to look into this further.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Dae R. Jeong
>
>
> ==================================================================
> BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in slip_ioctl+0x6db/0x7d0 drivers/net/slip/slip.c:1083
> Read of size 4 at addr ffff88804b856c80 by task syz-executor.0/9106
>
> CPU: 2 PID: 9106 Comm: syz-executor.0 Not tainted 6.0.0-rc7-00166-gf09dbf1cf0d5 #1
> Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014
> Call Trace:
> <TASK>
> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:88 [inline]
> dump_stack_lvl+0x1cf/0x2b7 lib/dump_stack.c:106
> print_address_description+0x21/0x470 mm/kasan/report.c:317
> print_report+0x108/0x1f0 mm/kasan/report.c:433
> kasan_report+0xe5/0x110 mm/kasan/report.c:495
> slip_ioctl+0x6db/0x7d0 drivers/net/slip/slip.c:1083
> tty_ioctl+0x11e9/0x1a20 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:2787
> vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:870 [inline]
> __se_sys_ioctl+0x110/0x180 fs/ioctl.c:856
> do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:51 [inline]
> do_syscall_64+0x4e/0xa0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:82
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
> RIP: 0033:0x478d29
> Code: f7 d8 64 89 02 b8 ff ff ff ff c3 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 bc ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> RSP: 002b:00007fbbbdfb8be8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000781408 RCX: 0000000000478d29
> RDX: 0000000020000040 RSI: 00000000402c542c RDI: 0000000000000003
> RBP: 00000000f477909a R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000781580
> r13: 0000000000781414 R14: 0000000000781408 R15: 00007ffcfdc4f040
> </TASK>
>
> Allocated by task 9103:
...
> kvzalloc include/linux/slab.h:758 [inline]
> alloc_netdev_mqs+0x86/0x1240 net/core/dev.c:10603
> sl_alloc drivers/net/slip/slip.c:756 [inline]
> slip_open+0x489/0x1240 drivers/net/slip/slip.c:817
> tty_ldisc_open+0xb4/0x120 drivers/tty/tty_ldisc.c:433
> tty_set_ldisc+0x366/0x860 drivers/tty/tty_ldisc.c:558
> tiocsetd drivers/tty/tty_io.c:2433 [inline]
> tty_ioctl+0x168f/0x1a20 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:2714
> vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
...
>
> Freed by task 9105:
...
> kfree+0x108/0x460 mm/slub.c:4567
> device_release+0x189/0x220
> kobject_cleanup+0x24f/0x360 lib/kobject.c:673
> netdev_run_todo+0x14ac/0x15a0 net/core/dev.c:10385
> unregister_netdev+0x1e9/0x270 net/core/dev.c:10922
> tty_ldisc_hangup+0x224/0x750 drivers/tty/tty_ldisc.c:700
The question is whether the slip (and at least both ppps too) ldisc
should free resources in hangup(). This should be IMO done only in
close(). ndcmddcmmms -- sorry, my cat literally stepped in and had to
express her opinion too.
As calling hangup() does not guarantee anything from the ldisc/tty POV.
While after/during close(), other ldisc ops must not be invoked/running.
> __tty_hangup+0x5b4/0x870 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:637
> tty_vhangup drivers/tty/tty_io.c:707 [inline]
> tty_ioctl+0xa7f/0x1a20 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:2718
> vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
thanks,
--
js
suse labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists