linux-kernel - Re: [syzbot] [virt?] upstream test error: KMSAN: use-after-free in vring_map_one

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <376fd3de-eb27-48ce-bdd5-86b0bca85ba7@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 08:47:50 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
 syzbot <syzbot+ac856b8b866cca41352c@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
 eperezma@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev,
 xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [virt?] upstream test error: KMSAN: use-after-free in
 vring_map_one_sg

On 10/14/25 4:41 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 4:17 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On 10/13/25 10:08 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 09:37:29AM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>>>> On 10/13/25 9:20 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 1:29 PM Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 11, 2025 at 3:40 PM Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #syz test
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 11, 2025 at 4:38 AM syzbot
>>>>>>> <syzbot+ac856b8b866cca41352c@...kaller.appspotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Paolo, it looks like the GSO tunnel features will leave uninitialized
>>>>>> vnet header field which trigger KMSAN warning.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please have a look at the patch (which has been tested by syzbot) or
>>>>>> propose another one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Forget the attachment.
>>>>
>>>> I have a few questions. The report mentions both UaF and uninit; the
>>>> patch addresses "just" the uninit access. It's not clear to me if and
>>>> how the UaF is addressed, and why/if it's related to the uninit access.
>>>
>>> I'd like to understand that, too.
>>
>> Somewhat related: the syzbot dashboard reports that the issue is no more
>> reproducible on plain Linus' tree:
>>
>> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=ac856b8b866cca41352c
> 
> Interesting.
> 
>>
>> """
>> * repros no longer work on HEAD.
>> """
>>
>> Possibly there was some external problem?
> 
> I think at least we need to make sure no information as we did in
> virtio_net_hdr_from_skb():
> 
> static inline int virtio_net_hdr_from_skb(const struct sk_buff *skb,
>                                           struct virtio_net_hdr *hdr,
>                                           bool little_endian,
>                                           bool has_data_valid,
>                                           int vlan_hlen)
> {
>         memset(hdr, 0, sizeof(*hdr));   /* no info leak */

I agree it makes sense to fully initialize the
virtio_net_hdr_v1_hash_tunnel struct. I would prefer to individually
zero the related fields (as in your initial patch). Hopefully the
compiler is smart enough to generate a single 64bit store instruction.

Still the backtrace reported by syzbot makes little sense to me: "uninit
created" at skb free time?!? UaF ?!? I suggest avoiding explicitly
marking the syzbot report closed with the formal patch.

Thanks,

Paolo