netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: fix for a race condition in the inet frag code

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]

Date:	Mon, 03 Mar 2014 15:49:56 +0100
From:	Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...hat.com>
To:	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: fix for a race condition in the inet frag code

On 03/03/2014 03:40 PM, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...hat.com> wrote:
>> I stumbled upon this very serious bug while hunting for another one,
>> it's a very subtle race condition between inet_frag_evictor,
>> inet_frag_intern and the IPv4/6 frag_queue and expire functions (basically
>> the users of inet_frag_kill/inet_frag_put).
>> What happens is that after a fragment has been added to the hash chain but
>> before it's been added to the lru_list (inet_frag_lru_add), it may get
>> deleted (either by an expired timer if the system load is high or the
>> timer sufficiently low, or by the fraq_queue function for different
>> reasons) before it's added to the lru_list
> 
> Sorry.  Not following here, see below.
> 
>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_fragment.c b/net/ipv4/inet_fragment.c
>> index bb075fc9a14f..322dcebfc588 100644
>> --- a/net/ipv4/inet_fragment.c
>> +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_fragment.c
>> @@ -278,9 +278,10 @@ static struct inet_frag_queue *inet_frag_intern(struct netns_frags *nf,
>>  
>>  	atomic_inc(&qp->refcnt);
>>  	hlist_add_head(&qp->list, &hb->chain);
>> +	inet_frag_lru_add(nf, qp);
>>  	spin_unlock(&hb->chain_lock);
>>  	read_unlock(&f->lock);
> 
> If I understand correctly your're saying that qp can be free'd on
> another/cpu timer right after dropping the locks.  But how is it
> possible?
> 
> ->refcnt is bumped above when arming the timer (before dropping chain
> lock), so even if the frag_expire timer fires instantly it should not
> free qp.
> 
> What am I missing?
> 
> Thanks,
> Florian
> 
An important point is that inet_frag_kill removes both the timer's refcnt and
has an unconditional atomic_dec to remove the original/guarding refcnt, so it
basically removes everything that's in the way.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html