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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20190821064130.GN2879@gauss3.secunet.de> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 08:41:30 +0200 From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com> To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de> CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>, <syzbot+8cc27ace5f6972910b31@...kaller.appspotmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec] xfrm: policy: avoid warning splat when merging nodes On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:32:13AM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > syzbot reported a splat: > xfrm_policy_inexact_list_reinsert+0x625/0x6e0 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:877 > CPU: 1 PID: 6756 Comm: syz-executor.1 Not tainted 5.3.0-rc2+ #57 > Call Trace: > xfrm_policy_inexact_node_reinsert net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:922 [inline] > xfrm_policy_inexact_node_merge net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:958 [inline] > xfrm_policy_inexact_insert_node+0x537/0xb50 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1023 > xfrm_policy_inexact_alloc_chain+0x62b/0xbd0 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1139 > xfrm_policy_inexact_insert+0xe8/0x1540 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1182 > xfrm_policy_insert+0xdf/0xce0 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1574 > xfrm_add_policy+0x4cf/0x9b0 net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c:1670 > xfrm_user_rcv_msg+0x46b/0x720 net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c:2676 > netlink_rcv_skb+0x1f0/0x460 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2477 > xfrm_netlink_rcv+0x74/0x90 net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c:2684 > netlink_unicast_kernel net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1302 [inline] > netlink_unicast+0x809/0x9a0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1328 > netlink_sendmsg+0xa70/0xd30 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1917 > sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:637 [inline] > sock_sendmsg net/socket.c:657 [inline] > > There is no reproducer, however, the warning can be reproduced > by adding rules with ever smaller prefixes. > > The sanity check ("does the policy match the node") uses the prefix value > of the node before its updated to the smaller value. > > To fix this, update the prefix earlier. The bug has no impact on tree > correctness, this is only to prevent a false warning. > > Reported-by: syzbot+8cc27ace5f6972910b31@...kaller.appspotmail.com > Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de> Applied, thanks Florian!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists