linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] nbd: pass nbd_sock to nbd_read

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]

Date:   Thu, 28 Sep 2023 12:05:05 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To:     linan666@...weicloud.com
Cc:     josef@...icpanda.com, axboe@...nel.dk, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        nbd@...er.debian.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linan122@...wei.com, yukuai3@...wei.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
        houtao1@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com, ming.lei@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nbd: pass nbd_sock to nbd_read_reply() instead of index

On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 10:33:08AM +0800, linan666@...weicloud.com wrote:
> From: Li Nan <linan122@...wei.com>
> 
> If a socket is processing ioctl 'NBD_SET_SOCK', config->socks might be
> krealloc in nbd_add_socket(), and a garbage request is received now, a UAF
> may occurs.
> 
>   T1
>   nbd_ioctl
>    __nbd_ioctl
>     nbd_add_socket
>      blk_mq_freeze_queue
> 				T2
>   				recv_work
>   				 nbd_read_reply
>   				  sock_xmit
>      krealloc config->socks
> 				   def config->socks
> 
> Pass nbd_sock to nbd_read_reply(). And introduce a new function
> sock_xmit_recv(), which differs from sock_xmit only in the way it get
> socket.
> 

I am wondering why not grab queue usage counter before calling nbd_read_reply()
for avoiding such issue, something like the following change:

diff --git a/drivers/block/nbd.c b/drivers/block/nbd.c
index df1cd0f718b8..09215b605b12 100644
--- a/drivers/block/nbd.c
+++ b/drivers/block/nbd.c
@@ -837,9 +837,6 @@ static void recv_work(struct work_struct *work)
 	while (1) {
 		struct nbd_reply reply;
 
-		if (nbd_read_reply(nbd, args->index, &reply))
-			break;
-
 		/*
 		 * Grab .q_usage_counter so request pool won't go away, then no
 		 * request use-after-free is possible during nbd_handle_reply().
@@ -852,6 +849,9 @@ static void recv_work(struct work_struct *work)
 			break;
 		}
 
+		if (nbd_read_reply(nbd, args->index, &reply))
+			break;
+
 		cmd = nbd_handle_reply(nbd, args->index, &reply);
 		if (IS_ERR(cmd)) {
 			percpu_ref_put(&q->q_usage_counter);

Thanks,
Ming