Message-ID: <Y4S7XENL7TgIEtPA@nanopsycho>
Date:   Mon, 28 Nov 2022 14:52:00 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...dia.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: devlink: fix UAF in
 devlink_compat_running_version()

Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 12:50:15PM CET, leon@...nel.org wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 10:58:58AM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 10:20:53AM CET, idosch@...sch.org wrote:
>> >On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 06:18:00PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 23 Nov 2022 21:18:14 +0200 Ido Schimmel wrote:
>> >> > > I used the fix code proposed by Jakub, but it didn't work correctly, so
>> >> > > I tried to correct and improve it, and need some devlink helper.
>> >> > > 
>> >> > > Anyway, it is a nsim problem, if we want fix this without touch devlink,
>> >> > > I think we can add a 'registered' field in struct nsim_dev, and it can be
>> >> > > checked in nsim_get_devlink_port() like this:  
>> >> > 
>> >> > I read the discussion and it's not clear to me why this is a netdevsim
>> >> > specific problem. The fundamental problem seems to be that it is
>> >> > possible to hold a reference on a devlink instance before it's
>> >> > registered and that devlink_free() will free the instance regardless of
>> >> > its current reference count because it expects devlink_unregister() to
>> >> > block. In this case, the instance was never registered, so
>> >> > devlink_unregister() is not called.
>> >> > 
>> >> > ethtool was able to get a reference on the devlink instance before it
>> >> > was registered because netdevsim registers its netdevs before
>> >> > registering its devlink instance. However, netdevsim is not the only one
>> >> > doing this: funeth, ice, prestera, mlx4, mlxsw, nfp and potentially
>> >> > others do the same thing.
>> >> > 
>> >> > When you think about it, it's strange that it's even possible for
>> >> > ethtool to reach the driver when the netdev used in the request is long
>> >> > gone, but it's not holding a reference on the netdev (it's holding a
>> >> > reference on the devlink instance instead) and
>> >> > devlink_compat_running_version() is called without RTNL.
>> >> 
>> >> Indeed. We did a bit of a flip-flop with the devlink locking rules
>> >> and the fact that the instance is reachable before it is registered 
>> >> is a leftover from a previous restructuring :(
>> >> 
>> >> Hence my preference to get rid of the ordering at the driver level 
>> >> than to try to patch it up in the code. Dunno if that's convincing.
>> >
>> >I don't have a good solution, but changing all the drivers to register
>> >their netdevs after the devlink instance is going to be quite painful
>> >and too big for 'net'. I feel like the main motivation for this is the
>> >ethtool compat stuff, which is not very convincing IMO. I'm quite happy
>> >with the current flow where drivers call devlink_register() at the end
>> >of their probe.
>> >
>> >Regarding a solution for the current crash, assuming we agree it's not a
>> >netdevsim specific problem, I think the current fix [1] is OK. Note that
>> >while it fixes the crash, it potentially creates other (less severe)
>> >problems. After user space receives RTM_NEWLINK notification it will
>> >need to wait for a certain period of time before issuing
>> >'ETHTOOL_GDRVINFO' as otherwise it will not get the firmware version. I
>> >guess it's not a big deal for drivers that only register one netdev
>> >since they will very quickly follow with devlink_register(), but the
>> >race window is larger for drivers that need to register many netdevs,
>> >for either physical switch or eswitch ports.
>> >
>> >Long term, we either need to find a way to make the ethtool compat stuff
>> >work correctly or just get rid of it and have affected drivers implement
>> >the relevant ethtool operations instead of relying on devlink.
>> >
>> >[1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20221122121048.776643-1-yangyingliang@huawei.com/
>> 
>> I just had a call with Ido. We both think that this might be a good
>> solution for -net to avoid the use after free.
>> 
>> For net-next, we eventually should change driver init flows to register
>> devlink instance first and only after that register devlink_port and
>> related netdevice. The ordering is important for the userspace app. For
>> example the init flow:
>> <- RTnetlink new netdev event
>> app sees devlink_port handle in IFLA_DEVLINK_PORT
>> -> query devlink instance using this handle
>> <- ENODEV
>> 
>> The instance is not registered yet.
>
>This is supposed to be handled by devlink_notify_register() which sends
>"delayed" notifications after devlink_register() is called.
>
>Unless something is broken, the scenario above shouldn't happen.

Nope, RTnetlink message for new netdev is not handled by that. It is
sent right away.


>
>> 
>> So we need to make sure all devlink_port_register() calls are happening
>> after devlink_register(). This is aligned with the original flow before
>> devlink_register() was moved by Leon. Also it is aligned with devlink
>> reload and devlink port split flows.
>> 
>
>I don't know what it means.

What I mean is that during port split, devlink instance is registered.
During port creation and removal during reload, devlink instance is
registered. We should maintain the same ordering during init/fini I
believe.


>
>Thanks

Powered by blists - more mailing lists