[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM_iQpXHktH+Wo7GtJC4afY_Wm11PpKcNFx41f_x4Vs93J-bMA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:49:31 -0800
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, jarno@....org,
Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>,
philip.pettersson@...il.com, weongyo.linux@...il.com,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: net/packet: use-after-free in packet_rcv_fanout
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 19:19 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
>> More likely the bug is in fanout_add(), with a buggy sequence in error
>> case, and not correct locking.
>>
>> kfree(po->rollover);
>> po->rollover = NULL;
>>
>> Two cpus entering fanout_add() (using the same af_packet socket,
>> syzkaller courtesy...) might both see po->fanout being NULL.
>>
>> Then they grab the mutex. Too late...
>
> Patch could be :
>
For me, clearly the data structure that use-after-free'd is struct sock
rather than struct packet_rollover.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists