netdev - Re: [Patch net] socket: close race condition between sock_close() and sockfs

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: <20180607220446.GX30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 7 Jun 2018 23:04:47 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        shankarapailoor <shankarapailoor@...il.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch net] socket: close race condition between sock_close()
 and sockfs_setattr()

On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 02:45:58PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 01:39:49PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> >> fchownat() doesn't even hold refcnt of fd until it figures out
> >> fd is really needed (otherwise is ignored) and releases it after
> >> it resolves the path. This means sock_close() could race with
> >> sockfs_setattr(), which leads to a NULL pointer dereference
> >> since typically we set sock->sk to NULL in ->release().
> >>
> >> As pointed out by Al, this is unique to sockfs. So we can fix this
> >> in socket layer by acquiring inode_lock in sock_close() and
> >> checking against NULL in sockfs_setattr().
> >
> > That looks like a massive overkill - it's way heavier than it should be.
> 
> I don't see any other quick way to fix this. My initial thought is
> to keep that refcnt until path_put(), apparently you don't like it
> either.

You do realize that the same ->setattr() can be called by way of
chown() on /proc/self/fd/<n>, right?  What would you do there -
bump refcount on that struct file when traversing that symlink and
hold it past the end of pathname resolution, until... what exactly?