netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] net: ipv6: fix use-after-free Read in __xfrm6_tunnel_spi

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]

Date:   Sun, 26 Jul 2020 13:07:25 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     B K Karthik <bkkarthik@...u.pes.edu>
Cc:     Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: ipv6: fix use-after-free Read in __xfrm6_tunnel_spi_lookup

On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 11:12 PM B K Karthik <bkkarthik@...u.pes.edu> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 11:05 AM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 8:09 PM B K Karthik <bkkarthik@...u.pes.edu> wrote:
> > > @@ -103,10 +103,10 @@ static int __xfrm6_tunnel_spi_check(struct net *net, u32 spi)
> > >  {
> > >         struct xfrm6_tunnel_net *xfrm6_tn = xfrm6_tunnel_pernet(net);
> > >         struct xfrm6_tunnel_spi *x6spi;
> > > -       int index = xfrm6_tunnel_spi_hash_byspi(spi);
> > > +       int index = xfrm6_tunnel_spi_hash_byaddr((const xfrm_address_t *)spi);
> > >
> > >         hlist_for_each_entry(x6spi,
> > > -                            &xfrm6_tn->spi_byspi[index],
> > > +                            &xfrm6_tn->spi_byaddr[index],
> > >                              list_byspi) {
> > >                 if (x6spi->spi == spi)
> >
> > How did you convince yourself this is correct? This lookup is still
> > using spi. :)
>
> I'm sorry, but my intention behind writing this patch was not to fix
> the UAF, but to fix a slab-out-of-bound.

Odd, your $subject is clearly UAF, so is the stack trace in your changelog.
:)


> If required, I can definitely change the subject line and resend the
> patch, but I figured this was correct for
> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=058d05f470583ab2843b1d6785fa8d0658ef66ae
> . since that particular report did not have a reproducer,
> Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com> suggested that I test this patch on
> other reports for xfrm/spi .

You have to change it to avoid misleading.

>
> Forgive me if this was the wrong way to send a patch for that
> particular report, but I guessed since the reproducer did not trigger
> the crash
> for UAF, I would leave the subject line as 'fix UAF' :)
>
> xfrm6_spi_hash_by_hash seemed more convincing because I had to prevent
> a slab-out-of-bounds because it uses ipv6_addr_hash.
> It would be of great help if you could help me understand how this was
> able to fix a UAF.

Sure, you just avoid a pointer deref, which of course can fix the UAF,
but I still don't think it is correct in any aspect.

Even if it is a OOB, you still have to explain why it happened. Once
again, I can't see how it could happen either.

>
> >
> > More importantly, can you explain how UAF happens? Apparently
> > the syzbot stack traces you quote make no sense at all. I also
> > looked at other similar reports, none of them makes sense to me.
>
> Forgive me, but I do not understand what you mean by the stack traces
> (this or other similar reports) "make no sense".

Because the stack trace in your changelog clearly shows it is allocated
in tomoyo_init_log(), which is a buffer in struct tomoyo_query, but
none of xfrm paths uses it. Or do you see anything otherwise?

Thanks.