linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] arm64: amu: Rule out potential use after free

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: <20240418105052.zvkomz5yeayie4ph@bogus>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 11:50:52 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	ionela.voinescu@....com, vanshikonda@...amperecomputing.com,
	will@...nel.org, catalin.marinas@....com,
	vincent.guittot@...aro.org, sumitg@...dia.com,
	yang@...amperecomputing.com, lihuisong@...wei.com,
	viresh.kumar@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] arm64: amu: Rule out potential use after free

On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 10:38:45AM +0100, Beata Michalska wrote:
> For the time being, the amu_fie_cpus cpumask is being exclusively used
> by the AMU-related internals of FIE support and is guaranteed to be
> valid on every access currently made. Still the mask is not being
> invalidated on one of the error handling code paths, which leaves
> a soft spot with potential risk of uaf for CPUMASK_OFFSTACK cases.
> To make things sound, set the cpumaks pointer explicitly to NULL upon
> failing to register the cpufreq notifier.
> Note that, due to the quirks of CPUMASK_OFFSTACK, this change needs to
> be wrapped with grim ifdefing (it would be better served by
> incorporating this into free_cpumask_var ...)
>

Yes it doesn't look neat.

> Signed-off-by: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@....com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> index 1a2c72f3e7f8..3c814a278534 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> @@ -244,8 +244,12 @@ static int __init init_amu_fie(void)
>
>  	ret = cpufreq_register_notifier(&init_amu_fie_notifier,
>  					CPUFREQ_POLICY_NOTIFIER);
> -	if (ret)
> +	if (ret) {
>  		free_cpumask_var(amu_fie_cpus);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK
> +		amu_fie_cpus = NULL;
> +#endif
> +	}

Instead of this #ifdeffery, I was wondering if we can actually do the
allocation in init_amu_fie_callback() the first time it gets called
checking if amu_fie_cpus is NULL. init_amu_fie_callback() must get called
only if the cpufreq_register_notifier() succeeds right ?

Also I don't see anyone calling amu_fie_setup(), so where do you think
the possible use after free could occur for amu_fie_cpus. Just thinking
out loud to check if I missed anything.

--
Regards,
Sudeep