linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v6] net: ioctl: Use kernel memory on protocol ioctl callbacks

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: <5bd6ced877e97ac674d1308eab0b8d2107b7ab85.camel@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 08 Jun 2023 15:57:48 +0200
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>,
        Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
Cc:     alex.aring@...il.com, andrea.righi@...onical.com,
        asml.silence@...il.com, ast@...nel.org, axboe@...nel.dk,
        courmisch@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, dccp@...r.kernel.org,
        dsahern@...nel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, gnault@...hat.com,
        hbh25y@...il.com, joannelkoong@...il.com, kernelxing@...cent.com,
        kuba@...nel.org, leit@...com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org,
        lucien.xin@...il.com, marcelo.leitner@...il.com,
        martin.lau@...nel.org, martineau@...nel.org,
        matthieu.baerts@...sares.net, miquel.raynal@...tlin.com,
        mptcp@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        stefan@...enfreihafen.org, willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com,
        wojciech.drewek@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6] net: ioctl: Use kernel memory on protocol
 ioctl callbacks

On Thu, 2023-06-08 at 01:43 -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> Hello Kuniyuki,
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 10:31:42AM -0700, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> > > +/* This is the most common ioctl prep function, where the result (4 bytes) is
> > > + * copied back to userspace if the ioctl() returns successfully. No input is
> > > + * copied from userspace as input argument.
> > > + */
> > > +static int sock_ioctl_out(struct sock *sk, unsigned int cmd, void __user *arg)
> > > +{
> > > +	int ret, karg = 0;
> > > +
> > > +	ret = sk->sk_prot->ioctl(sk, cmd, &karg);
> > 
> > We need READ_ONCE(sk->sk_prot) as IPv4 conversion or ULP chnage could
> > occur at the same time.
> 
> Thanks for the heads-up. I would like to pick you brain and understand
> a bit more about READ_ONCE() and what is the situation that READ_ONCE()
> will solve.

AFAICS, in this specific case READ_ONCE() should not address any "real"
bug causing visible issue.

Still the lack of it will likely cause syzkaller report for (harmless,
AFAICS) 'data races' around sk->sk_prot. We want to avoid such reports,
even if harmless, because they can end-up hiding more relevant bugs.

> Is the situation related to when sock_ioctl_out() start to execute, and
> "sk->sk_prot" changes in a different thread? If that is the case, the
> arguments (cmd and arg) will be from the "previous" instance.
> 
> Also, grepping for "sk->sk_prot->", I see more than a bunch of calls
> that do not use READ_ONCE() barrier. Why is this case different?

Races on sk->sk_prot can happen only on inet6_stream_ops (due to ulp
and/or ADDRFORM) inet6_dgram_ops (due to ADDRFORM). AFAICS here
READ_ONCE() is  needed as we can reach here via inet6_stream_ops-
>inet6_ioctl

Cheers,

Paolo