netdev - [PATCH net] net: tls: avoid hanging tasks on the tx

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 28 Feb 2023 16:28:57 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     davem@...emloft.net
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        syzbot+9c0268252b8ef967c62e@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, borisp@...dia.com,
        john.fastabend@...il.com, simon.horman@...ronome.com
Subject: [PATCH net] net: tls: avoid hanging tasks on the tx_lock

syzbot sent a hung task report and Eric explains that adversarial
receiver may keep RWIN at 0 for a long time, so we are not guaranteed
to make forward progress. Thread which took tx_lock and went to sleep
may not release tx_lock for hours. Use interruptible sleep where
possible and reschedule the work if it can't take the lock.

Testing: existing selftest passes

Reported-by: syzbot+9c0268252b8ef967c62e@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Fixes: 79ffe6087e91 ("net/tls: add a TX lock")
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/000000000000e412e905f5b46201@google.com/
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # wait 4 weeks
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
---
CC: borisp@...dia.com
CC: john.fastabend@...il.com
CC: simon.horman@...ronome.com
---
 net/tls/tls_sw.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/tls/tls_sw.c b/net/tls/tls_sw.c
index 021d760f9133..635b8bf6b937 100644
--- a/net/tls/tls_sw.c
+++ b/net/tls/tls_sw.c
@@ -956,7 +956,9 @@ int tls_sw_sendmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t size)
 			       MSG_CMSG_COMPAT))
 		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
 
-	mutex_lock(&tls_ctx->tx_lock);
+	ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&tls_ctx->tx_lock);
+	if (ret)
+		return ret;
 	lock_sock(sk);
 
 	if (unlikely(msg->msg_controllen)) {
@@ -1290,7 +1292,9 @@ int tls_sw_sendpage(struct sock *sk, struct page *page,
 		      MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST | MSG_SENDPAGE_NOPOLICY))
 		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
 
-	mutex_lock(&tls_ctx->tx_lock);
+	ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&tls_ctx->tx_lock);
+	if (ret)
+		return ret;
 	lock_sock(sk);
 	ret = tls_sw_do_sendpage(sk, page, offset, size, flags);
 	release_sock(sk);
@@ -2435,11 +2439,19 @@ static void tx_work_handler(struct work_struct *work)
 
 	if (!test_and_clear_bit(BIT_TX_SCHEDULED, &ctx->tx_bitmask))
 		return;
-	mutex_lock(&tls_ctx->tx_lock);
-	lock_sock(sk);
-	tls_tx_records(sk, -1);
-	release_sock(sk);
-	mutex_unlock(&tls_ctx->tx_lock);
+
+	if (mutex_trylock(&tls_ctx->tx_lock)) {
+		lock_sock(sk);
+		tls_tx_records(sk, -1);
+		release_sock(sk);
+		mutex_unlock(&tls_ctx->tx_lock);
+	} else if (!test_and_set_bit(BIT_TX_SCHEDULED, &ctx->tx_bitmask)) {
+		/* Someone is holding the tx_lock, they will likely run Tx
+		 * and cancel the work on their way out of the lock section.
+		 * Schedule a long delay just in case.
+		 */
+		schedule_delayed_work(&ctx->tx_work.work, msecs_to_jiffies(10));
+	}
 }
 
 static bool tls_is_tx_ready(struct tls_sw_context_tx *ctx)
-- 
2.39.2