linux-kernel - Re: CVE-2024-41041: udp: Set SOCK_RCU_FREE earlier in udp_lib_get

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: <2024090401-underuse-resale-3eef@gregkh>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 13:31:13 +0200
From: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Siddh Raman Pant <siddh.raman.pant@...cle.com>
Cc: "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: CVE-2024-41041: udp: Set SOCK_RCU_FREE earlier in
 udp_lib_get_port().

On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 11:26:36AM +0000, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03 2024 at 18:28:14 +0530, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 02:53:57PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 2:07 PM gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
> > > <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 11:56:17AM +0000, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 16:32:36 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > > > In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > udp: Set SOCK_RCU_FREE earlier in udp_lib_get_port().
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > [...]
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > We had the same bug in TCP and fixed it in commit 871019b22d1b ("net:
> > > > > > set SOCK_RCU_FREE before inserting socket into hashtable").
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Let's apply the same fix for UDP.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > [...]
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The Linux kernel CVE team has assigned CVE-2024-41041 to this issue.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Affected and fixed versions
> > > > > > ===========================
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >     Issue introduced in 4.20 with commit 6acc9b432e67 and fixed in 5.4.280 with commit 7a67c4e47626
> > > > > >     Issue introduced in 4.20 with commit 6acc9b432e67 and fixed in 5.10.222 with commit 9f965684c57c
> > > > > 
> > > > > These versions don't have the TCP fix backported. Please do so.
> > > > 
> > > > What fix backported exactly to where?  Please be more specific.  Better
> > > > yet, please provide working, and tested, backports.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > commit 871019b22d1bcc9fab2d1feba1b9a564acbb6e99
> > > Author: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
> > > Date:   Wed Nov 8 13:13:25 2023 -0800
> > > 
> > >     net: set SOCK_RCU_FREE before inserting socket into hashtable
> > > ...
> > >     Fixes: 6acc9b432e67 ("bpf: Add helper to retrieve socket in BPF")
> > > 
> > > It seems 871019b22d1bcc9fab2d1feba1b9a564acbb6e99 has not been pushed
> > > to 5.10 or 5.4 lts
> > > 
> > > Stanislav mentioned a WARN_ONCE() being hit, I presume we could push
> > > the patch to 5.10 and 5.4.
> > > 
> > > I guess this was skipped because of a merge conflict.
> > 
> > Yes, the commit does not apply, we need someone to send a working
> > backport for us to be able to take it.
> > 
> > Siddh, can you please do this?
> 
> Sure.
> 
> I see there are Stable-dep commits too, but the seem unrelated and
> require some commits from another feature patchset. Do I need to
> backport them too?

Do what you think you need to do :)