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  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:   Fri, 25 Nov 2022 14:28:30 +0000
From:   Dmitry Safonov <>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <>,
        Eric Dumazet <>,
        Jakub Kicinski <>
Cc:, Ard Biesheuvel <>,
        Bob Gilligan <>,
        Dmitry Safonov <>,
        Francesco Ruggeri <>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <>,
        Jason Baron <>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <>,
        Paolo Abeni <>,
        Salam Noureddine <>,
        Steven Rostedt <>,,
        "David S. Miller" <>,
        David Ahern <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/5] jump_label: Prevent key->enabled int overflow

On 11/25/22 07:59, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 05:38:55PM +0000, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
>> 1. With CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL=n static_key_slow_inc() doesn't have any
>>    protection against key->enabled refcounter overflow.
>> 2. With CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL=y static_key_slow_inc_cpuslocked()
>>    still may turn the refcounter negative as (v + 1) may overflow.
>> key->enabled is indeed a ref-counter as it's documented in multiple
>> places: top comment in jump_label.h, Documentation/staging/static-keys.rst,
>> etc.
>> As -1 is reserved for static key that's in process of being enabled,
>> functions would break with negative key->enabled refcount:
>> - for CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL=n negative return of static_key_count()
>>   breaks static_key_false(), static_key_true()
>> - the ref counter may become 0 from negative side by too many
>>   static_key_slow_inc() calls and lead to use-after-free issues.
>> These flaws result in that some users have to introduce an additional
>> mutex and prevent the reference counter from overflowing themselves,
>> see bpf_enable_runtime_stats() checking the counter against INT_MAX / 2.
>> Prevent the reference counter overflow by checking if (v + 1) > 0.
>> Change functions API to return whether the increment was successful.
>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Safonov <>
>> Acked-by: Jakub Kicinski <>
> This looks good to me:
> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <>

Thank you, Peter!

> What is the plan for merging this? I'm assuming it would want to go
> through the network tree, but as already noted earlier it depends on a
> patch I have in tip/locking/core.
> Now I checked, tip/locking/core is *just* that one patch, so it might be
> possible to merge that branch and this series into the network tree and
> note that during the pull request to Linus.

I initially thought it has to go through tip trees because of the
dependence, but as you say it's just one patch.

I was also asked by Jakub on v4 to wait for Eric's Ack/Review, so once I
get a go from him, I will send all 6 patches for inclusion into -net
tree, if that will be in time before the merge window.

Thanks again for the review and ack,

Powered by blists - more mailing lists