linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] nfsd: free nfsd_file by gc after adding it to lru list

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: <37d6dab7-5031-4b96-b66e-9ba8f17d1adc@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:07:09 -0500
From: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
To: Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@...wei.com>, jlayton@...nel.org, neilb@...e.de,
        okorniev@...hat.com, Dai.Ngo@...cle.com, tom@...pey.com
Cc: linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        yukuai1@...weicloud.com, houtao1@...wei.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
        yangerkun@...wei.com, lilingfeng@...weicloud.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsd: free nfsd_file by gc after adding it to lru list

Hello!

On 1/12/25 9:59 PM, Li Lingfeng wrote:
> In nfsd_file_put, after inserting the nfsd_file into the nfsd_file_lru
> list, gc may be triggered in another thread and immediately release this
> nfsd_file, which will lead to a UAF when accessing this nfsd_file again.

Do you happen to have a reproducer that can trigger this issue?


> All the places where unhash is done will also perform lru_remove, so there
> is no need to do lru_remove separately here. After inserting the nfsd_file
> into the nfsd_file_lru list, it can be released by relying on gc.
> 
> Fixes: 4a0e73e635e3 ("NFSD: Leave open files out of the filecache LRU")

The code that is being replaced below was introduced in ac3a2585f018
("nfsd: rework refcounting in filecache"). This fix won't apply to
kernels that have only 4a0e73e635e3 but not ac3a2585f018, for instance.

At the very least we need to add "Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # v6.2" but
I'm not convinced "Fixes: 4a0e73e635e3" is correct.


> Signed-off-by: Li Lingfeng <lilingfeng3@...wei.com>
> ---
>   fs/nfsd/filecache.c | 12 ++----------
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
> index a1cdba42c4fa..37b65cb1579a 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/filecache.c
> @@ -372,18 +372,10 @@ nfsd_file_put(struct nfsd_file *nf)
>   		/* Try to add it to the LRU.  If that fails, decrement. */
>   		if (nfsd_file_lru_add(nf)) {
>   			/* If it's still hashed, we're done */
> -			if (test_bit(NFSD_FILE_HASHED, &nf->nf_flags)) {
> +			if (list_lru_count(&nfsd_file_lru))
>   				nfsd_file_schedule_laundrette();
> -				return;
> -			}

The above change does not seem to be related to the fix described
in the patch description. Can you help me understand why this is
needed?


> -			/*
> -			 * We're racing with unhashing, so try to remove it from
> -			 * the LRU. If removal fails, then someone else already
> -			 * has our reference.
> -			 */
> -			if (!nfsd_file_lru_remove(nf))
> -				return;
> +			return;
>   		}
>   	}
>   	if (refcount_dec_and_test(&nf->nf_ref))


-- 
Chuck Lever