linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: avoid use-after-free on device name

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

Message-Id: <D7XE2DSESCHX.328BJ5KCEFH0A@bootlin.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 16:46:59 +0100
From: Théo Lebrun <theo.lebrun@...tlin.com>
To: "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, "Danilo Krummrich"
 <dakr@...nel.org>, "Rob Herring" <robh@...nel.org>, "Saravana Kannan"
 <saravanak@...gle.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, "Grant
 Likely" <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, "Liam Girdwood" <lgirdwood@...il.com>, "Mark
 Brown" <broonie@...nel.org>, "Jaroslav Kysela" <perex@...ex.cz>, "Takashi
 Iwai" <tiwai@...e.com>, "Binbin Zhou" <zhoubinbin@...ngson.cn>,
 <linux-sound@...r.kernel.org>, "Vladimir Kondratiev"
 <vladimir.kondratiev@...ileye.com>, Grégory Clement
 <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>, "Thomas Petazzoni"
 <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, "Tawfik Bayouk"
 <tawfik.bayouk@...ileye.com>, <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] driver core: platform: avoid use-after-free on
 device name

On Thu Feb 20, 2025 at 3:06 PM CET, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 02:31:29PM +0100, Théo Lebrun wrote:
>> On Thu Feb 20, 2025 at 1:41 PM CET, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 12:00:11PM +0100, Théo Lebrun wrote:
>> >> The solution proposed is to add a flag to platform_device that tells if
>> >> it is responsible for freeing its name. We can then duplicate the
>> >> device name inside of_device_add() instead of copying the pointer.
>> >
>> > Ick.
>> >
>> >> What is done elsewhere?
>> >>  - Platform bus code does a copy of the argument name that is stored
>> >>    alongside the struct platform_device; see platform_device_alloc()[1].
>> >>  - Other busses duplicate the device name; either through a dynamic
>> >>    allocation [2] or through an array embedded inside devices [3].
>> >>  - Some busses don't have a separate name; when they want a name they
>> >>    take it from the device [4].
>> >
>> > Really ick.
>> >
>> > Let's do the right thing here and just get rid of the name pointer
>> > entirely in struct platform_device please.  Isn't that the correct
>> > thing that way the driver core logic will work properly for all of this.
>> 
>> I would agree, if it wasn't for this consideration that is found in the
>> commit message [0]:
>
> What, that the of code is broken?  Then it should be fixed, why does it
> need a pointer to a name at all anyway?  It shouldn't be needed there
> either.

I cannot guess why it originally has a separate pdev->name field.
All I can tell you is a good reason to have one, as quoted below.

>> > It is important to duplicate! pdev->name must not change to make sure
>> > the platform_match() return value is stable over time. If we updated
>> > pdev->name alongside dev->name, once a device probes and changes its
>> > name then the platform_match() return value would change.
>> 
>> I'd be fine sending a V2 that removes the field *and the fallback* [1],
>> but I don't have the full scope in mind to know what would become broken.
>> 
>> [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250218-pdev-uaf-v1-2-5ea1a0d3aba0@bootlin.com/
>> [1]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.13.3/source/drivers/base/platform.c#L1357
>
> The fallback will not need to be removed, properly point to the name of
> the device and it should work correctly.

No, it will not work correctly, as the above quote indicates.

Let's assume we remove the field, this situation would be broken:
 - OF allocates platform devices and gives them names.
 - A device matches with a driver, which gets probed.
 - During the probe, driver does a dev_set_name().
 - Afterwards, the upcoming platform_match() against other drivers are
   called with another device name.

We should be safe as there are guardraids to not probe twice a device,
see __driver_probe_device() that checks dev->driver is NULL. But it
isn't a situation we should be in.

Another broken situation:
 - OF allocates platform devices and gives them names.
 - A device matches with a driver, which gets probed based on its name.
 - During the probe, driver does a dev_set_name().
 - Module is removed.
 - Module is re-added, the (driver, device) pair don't end up matching
   again because the device name changed.

I might be missing other edge-cases.

Conclusion: we need a constant name for platform devices as we want the
return value of platform_match() to stay stable across time.

Regards,

--
Théo Lebrun, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com