netdev - Re: [PATCH net] af_unix: fix garbage collect vs. MSG

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOssrKdjuUbyHmzwLJFtu-KibPgG3s=LoDq3fgzkv=kTG+mZiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Jul 2021 16:29:01 +0200
From:   Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, kuba@...nel.org,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] af_unix: fix garbage collect vs. MSG_PEEK

On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 9:27 PM Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 05:36:21PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>
> >
> > Gc assumes that in-flight sockets that don't have an external ref can't
>
> I think this commit log could be expanded. I had to really study things
> to even beging to understand what was going on. I assume "Gc" here means
> specifically unix_gc()?

Yeah, the original description was not too good.  Commit cbcf01128d0a
("af_unix: fix garbage collect vs MSG_PEEK") now in Linus' tree has a
much expanded description.

> I note that unix_tot_inflight isn't an atomic but is read outside of
> locking by unix_release_sock() and wait_for_unix_gc(), which seems wrong
> (or at least inefficient).

I don't think it matters in practice.   Do you have specific worries?

> Doesn't this mean total_refs and inflight_refs can still get out of
> sync? What keeps an skb from being "visible" to unix_peek_fds() between
> the unix_gx() spin_unlock() and the unix_peek_fds() fget()?
>
> A: unix_gx():
>         spin_lock()
>         find "total_refs == inflight_refs", add to hitlist
>         spin_unlock()
> B: unix_peek_fds():
>         fget()
> A: unix_gc():
>         walk hitlist and free(skb)
> B: unix_peek_fds():
>         *use freed skb*
>
> I feel like I must be missing something since the above race would
> appear to exist even for unix_attach_fds()/unix_detach_fds():

What you are missing is that anything that could have been peeked must
not have been garbage collected.  I.e. the garbage collection
algorithm will find that there's an external in-flight reference to
the peeked socket and so it will not add it to the hitlist.

Thanks,
Miklos