[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202308181146.465B4F85@keescook>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2023 11:48:16 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>,
Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
Anna Schumaker <anna@...nel.org>,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@...app.com>, Dai Ngo <Dai.Ngo@...cle.com>,
Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Alexey Gladkov <legion@...nel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] creds: Convert cred.usage to refcount_t
On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 08:17:55PM +0200, Jann Horn wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 7:56 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Aug 2023 21:17:41 -0700 Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>
> > >
> > > atomic_t variables are currently used to implement reference counters
> > > with the following properties:
> > > - counter is initialized to 1 using atomic_set()
> > > - a resource is freed upon counter reaching zero
> > > - once counter reaches zero, its further
> > > increments aren't allowed
> > > - counter schema uses basic atomic operations
> > > (set, inc, inc_not_zero, dec_and_test, etc.)
> > >
> > > Such atomic variables should be converted to a newly provided
> > > refcount_t type and API that prevents accidental counter overflows and
> > > underflows. This is important since overflows and underflows can lead
> > > to use-after-free situation and be exploitable.
> >
> > ie, if we have bugs which we have no reason to believe presently exist,
> > let's bloat and slow down the kernel just in case we add some in the
> > future?
>
> Yeah. Or in case we currently have some that we missed.
Right, or to protect us against the _introduction_ of flaws.
> Though really we don't *just* need refcount_t to catch bugs; on a
> system with enough RAM you can also overflow many 32-bit refcounts by
> simply creating 2^32 actual references to an object. Depending on the
> structure of objects that hold such refcounts, that can start
> happening at around 2^32 * 8 bytes = 32 GiB memory usage, and it
> becomes increasingly practical to do this with more objects if you
> have significantly more RAM. I suppose you could avoid such issues by
> putting a hard limit of 32 GiB on the amount of slab memory and
> requiring that kernel object references are stored as pointers in slab
> memory, or by making all the refcounts 64-bit.
These problems are a different issue, and yes, the path out of it would
be to crank the size of refcount_t, etc.
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists