linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] erofs: avoid using multiple devices with different type

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: <c02f6e33-6788-412a-8622-49364d67d369@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 23:10:26 +0800
From: Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@...wei.com>
To: Sheng Yong <shengyong2021@...il.com>, <xiang@...nel.org>,
	<chao@...nel.org>, <zbestahu@...il.com>, <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	<dhavale@...gle.com>
CC: <linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Sheng Yong
	<shengyong1@...omi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] erofs: avoid using multiple devices with different
 type



On 2025/5/13 19:34, Sheng Yong wrote:
> From: Sheng Yong <shengyong1@...omi.com>
> 
> For multiple devices, both primary and extra devices should be the
> same type. `erofs_init_device` has already guaranteed that if the
> primary is a file-backed device, extra devices should also be
> regular files.
> 
> However, if the primary is a block device while the extra device
> is a file-backed device, `erofs_init_device` will get an ENOTBLK,
> which is not treated as an error in `erofs_fc_get_tree`, and that
> leads to an UAF:
> 
>    erofs_fc_get_tree
>      get_tree_bdev_flags(erofs_fc_fill_super)
>        erofs_read_superblock
>          erofs_init_device  // sbi->dif0 is not inited yet,
>                             // return -ENOTBLK
>        deactivate_locked_super
>          free(sbi)
>      if (err is -ENOTBLK)
>        sbi->dif0.file = filp_open()  // sbi UAF
> 
> So if -ENOTBLK is hitted in `erofs_init_device`, it means the
> primary device must be a block device, and the extra device
> is not a block device. The error can be converted to -EINVAL.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sheng Yong <shengyong1@...omi.com>
> ---
>   fs/erofs/super.c | 5 ++++-
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/super.c b/fs/erofs/super.c
> index 512877d7d855..16b5b1f66584 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/erofs/super.c
> @@ -165,8 +165,11 @@ static int erofs_init_device(struct erofs_buf *buf, struct super_block *sb,
>   				filp_open(dif->path, O_RDONLY | O_LARGEFILE, 0) :
>   				bdev_file_open_by_path(dif->path,
>   						BLK_OPEN_READ, sb->s_type, NULL);
> -		if (IS_ERR(file))
> +		if (IS_ERR(file)) {
> +			if (PTR_ERR(file) == -ENOTBLK)
> +				file = ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>   			return PTR_ERR(file);

Hi, Yong

Thank you, I think it is indeed a UAF problem. This fixes the problem 
introduced by fb176750266a ("erofs: add file-backed mount support"). How 
about considering adding the fixes tag?

In addition, I wonder may be we can only check the fc->s_fs_info (we can 
set it to NULL in .kill_sb) in erofs_fc_get_tree rather than change the 
error code. So this way we can reback the correct error message to user.

Thanks,
Hongbo

> +		}
>   
>   		if (!erofs_is_fileio_mode(sbi)) {
>   			dif->dax_dev = fs_dax_get_by_bdev(file_bdev(file),