netdev - Re: [PATCH v3] tun: fix use-after-free when register netdev failed

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 22 Aug 2019 20:55:31 +0800
From:   Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, <weiyongjun1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tun: fix use-after-free when register netdev failed



On 2019/8/22 14:07, Yang Yingliang wrote:
>
>
> On 2019/8/22 10:13, Jason Wang wrote:
>>
>> On 2019/8/20 上午10:28, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2019/8/20 上午9:25, David Miller wrote:
>>>> From: Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
>>>> Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 21:31:19 +0800
>>>>
>>>>> Call tun_attach() after register_netdevice() to make sure tfile->tun
>>>>> is not published until the netdevice is registered. So the read/write
>>>>> thread can not use the tun pointer that may freed by free_netdev().
>>>>> (The tun and dev pointer are allocated by alloc_netdev_mqs(), they 
>>>>> can
>>>>> be freed by netdev_freemem().)
>>>> register_netdevice() must always be the last operation in the order of
>>>> network device setup.
>>>>
>>>> At the point register_netdevice() is called, the device is visible 
>>>> globally
>>>> and therefore all of it's software state must be fully initialized and
>>>> ready for us.
>>>>
>>>> You're going to have to find another solution to these problems.
>>>
>>>
>>> The device is loosely coupled with sockets/queues. Each side is 
>>> allowed to be go away without caring the other side. So in this 
>>> case, there's a small window that network stack think the device has 
>>> one queue but actually not, the code can then safely drop them. 
>>> Maybe it's ok here with some comments?
>>>
>>> Or if not, we can try to hold the device before tun_attach and drop 
>>> it after register_netdevice().
>>
>>
>> Hi Yang:
>>
>> I think maybe we can try to hold refcnt instead of playing real num 
>> queues here. Do you want to post a V4?
> I think the refcnt can prevent freeing the memory in this case.
> When register_netdevice() failed, free_netdev() will be called directly,
> dev->pcpu_refcnt and dev are freed without checking refcnt of dev.
How about using patch-v1 that using a flag to check whether the device 
registered successfully.

>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>
>> .
>>
>
>
>
> .
>