netdev - Re: [PATCH net] tun, bpf: fix suspicious RCU usage in tun_{attach,detach}

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: <56FCEAA9.5060509@suse.cz>
Date:	Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:15:21 +0200
From:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To:	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, davem@...emloft.net
Cc:	alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, mkubecek@...e.cz,
	sasha.levin@...cle.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, mst@...hat.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] tun, bpf: fix suspicious RCU usage in
 tun_{attach,detach}_filter

On 03/31/2016, 02:13 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> Sasha Levin reported a suspicious rcu_dereference_protected() warning
> found while fuzzing with trinity that is similar to this one:
> 
>   [   52.765684] net/core/filter.c:2262 suspicious rcu_dereference_protected() usage!
>   [   52.765688] other info that might help us debug this:
>   [   52.765695] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
>   [   52.765701] 1 lock held by a.out/1525:
>   [   52.765704]  #0:  (rtnl_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff816a64b7>] rtnl_lock+0x17/0x20
>   [   52.765721] stack backtrace:
>   [   52.765728] CPU: 1 PID: 1525 Comm: a.out Not tainted 4.5.0+ #264
>   [...]
>   [   52.765768] Call Trace:
>   [   52.765775]  [<ffffffff813e488d>] dump_stack+0x85/0xc8
>   [   52.765784]  [<ffffffff810f2fa5>] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xd5/0x110
>   [   52.765792]  [<ffffffff816afdc2>] sk_detach_filter+0x82/0x90
>   [   52.765801]  [<ffffffffa0883425>] tun_detach_filter+0x35/0x90 [tun]
>   [   52.765810]  [<ffffffffa0884ed4>] __tun_chr_ioctl+0x354/0x1130 [tun]
>   [   52.765818]  [<ffffffff8136fed0>] ? selinux_file_ioctl+0x130/0x210
>   [   52.765827]  [<ffffffffa0885ce3>] tun_chr_ioctl+0x13/0x20 [tun]
>   [   52.765834]  [<ffffffff81260ea6>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x96/0x690
>   [   52.765843]  [<ffffffff81364af3>] ? security_file_ioctl+0x43/0x60
>   [   52.765850]  [<ffffffff81261519>] SyS_ioctl+0x79/0x90
>   [   52.765858]  [<ffffffff81003ba2>] do_syscall_64+0x62/0x140
>   [   52.765866]  [<ffffffff817d563f>] entry_SYSCALL64_slow_path+0x25/0x25
> 
> Same can be triggered with PROVE_RCU (+ PROVE_RCU_REPEATEDLY) enabled
> from tun_attach_filter() when user space calls ioctl(tun_fd, TUN{ATTACH,
> DETACH}FILTER, ...) for adding/removing a BPF filter on tap devices.
> 
> Since the fix in f91ff5b9ff52 ("net: sk_{detach|attach}_filter() rcu
> fixes") sk_attach_filter()/sk_detach_filter() now dereferences the
> filter with rcu_dereference_protected(), checking whether socket lock
> is held in control path.
> 
> Since its introduction in 994051625981 ("tun: socket filter support"),
> tap filters are managed under RTNL lock from __tun_chr_ioctl(). Thus the
> sock_owned_by_user(sk) doesn't apply in this specific case and therefore
> triggers the false positive.
> 
> Extend the BPF API with __sk_attach_filter()/__sk_detach_filter() pair
> that is used by tap filters and pass in lockdep_rtnl_is_held() for the
> rcu_dereference_protected() checks instead.

It seems to be gone with this patch here.

thanks,
-- 
js
suse labs