linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 01/13] mm/kfence: Add a new kunit test test_use_after_free_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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87cykhydvj.fsf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2024 10:36:08 +0530
From: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@...il.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>, Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>, Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>, "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>, Donet Tom <donettom@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Pavithra Prakash <pavrampu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Nirjhar Roy <nirjhar@...ux.ibm.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org, Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 01/13] mm/kfence: Add a new kunit test test_use_after_free_read_nofault()

Hello Kasan/kfence-devs, 

Wanted your inputs on this kfence kunit test [PATCH-1] and it's respective
powerpc fix [Patch-2]. The commit msgs has a good description of it. I
see that the same problem was noticed on s390 as well [1] a while ago.
So that makes me believe that maybe we should have a kunit test for the
same to make sure all architectures handles this properly. 

Thoughts?

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230213183858.1473681-1-hca@linux.ibm.com/

-ritesh

"Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@...il.com> writes:

> From: Nirjhar Roy <nirjhar@...ux.ibm.com>
>
> Faults from copy_from_kernel_nofault() needs to be handled by fixup
> table and should not be handled by kfence. Otherwise while reading
> /proc/kcore which uses copy_from_kernel_nofault(), kfence can generate
> false negatives. This can happen when /proc/kcore ends up reading an
> unmapped address from kfence pool.
>
> Let's add a testcase to cover this case.
>
> Co-developed-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nirjhar Roy <nirjhar@...ux.ibm.com>
> Cc: kasan-dev@...glegroups.com
> Cc: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org
> ---
>  mm/kfence/kfence_test.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c b/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c
> index 00fd17285285..f65fb182466d 100644
> --- a/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c
> +++ b/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c
> @@ -383,6 +383,22 @@ static void test_use_after_free_read(struct kunit *test)
>  	KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, report_matches(&expect));
>  }
>
> +static void test_use_after_free_read_nofault(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> +	const size_t size = 32;
> +	char *addr;
> +	char dst;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	setup_test_cache(test, size, 0, NULL);
> +	addr = test_alloc(test, size, GFP_KERNEL, ALLOCATE_ANY);
> +	test_free(addr);
> +	/* Use after free with *_nofault() */
> +	ret = copy_from_kernel_nofault(&dst, addr, 1);
> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ret, -EFAULT);
> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, report_available());
> +}
> +
>  static void test_double_free(struct kunit *test)
>  {
>  	const size_t size = 32;
> @@ -780,6 +796,7 @@ static struct kunit_case kfence_test_cases[] = {
>  	KFENCE_KUNIT_CASE(test_out_of_bounds_read),
>  	KFENCE_KUNIT_CASE(test_out_of_bounds_write),
>  	KFENCE_KUNIT_CASE(test_use_after_free_read),
> +	KFENCE_KUNIT_CASE(test_use_after_free_read_nofault),
>  	KFENCE_KUNIT_CASE(test_double_free),
>  	KFENCE_KUNIT_CASE(test_invalid_addr_free),
>  	KFENCE_KUNIT_CASE(test_corruption),
> --
> 2.46.0