netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V2] ptp: fix corrupted list in ptp

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

Message-ID: <tencent_66A4C45E9778B760C6C3D36AE37509600305@qq.com>
Date: Fri,  3 Nov 2023 07:12:07 +0800
From: Edward Adam Davis <eadavis@...com>
To: jeremy@...ine.org
Cc: davem@...emloft.net,
	eadavis@...com,
	habetsm.xilinx@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	reibax@...il.com,
	richardcochran@...il.com,
	syzbot+df3f3ef31f60781fa911@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
	syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2] ptp: fix corrupted list in ptp_open

Hi Jeremy,

On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 14:16:54 -0400 Jeremy Cline wrote:
>> There is no lock protection when writing ptp->tsevqs in ptp_open(),
>> ptp_release(), which can cause data corruption, use mutex lock to avoid this 
>> issue.
>> 
>> Moreover, ptp_release() should not be used to release the queue in ptp_read(),
>> and it should be deleted together.
>> 
>> Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+df3f3ef31f60781fa911@...kaller.appspotmail.com
>> Fixes: 8f5de6fb2453 ("ptp: support multiple timestamp event readers")
>> Signed-off-by: Edward Adam Davis <eadavis@...com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c | 11 +++++++++--
>>  drivers/ptp/ptp_clock.c   |  3 +++
>>  drivers/ptp/ptp_private.h |  1 +
>>  3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c b/drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c
>> index 282cd7d24077..e31551d2697d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c
>> @@ -109,6 +109,9 @@ int ptp_open(struct posix_clock_context *pccontext, fmode_t fmode)
>>  	struct timestamp_event_queue *queue;
>>  	char debugfsname[32];
>>  
>> +	if (mutex_lock_interruptible(&ptp->tsevq_mux)) 
>> +		return -ERESTARTSYS;
>> +
>>  	queue = kzalloc(sizeof(*queue), GFP_KERNEL);
>>  	if (!queue)
>>  		return -EINVAL;
>> @@ -132,15 +135,20 @@ int ptp_open(struct posix_clock_context *pccontext, fmode_t fmode)
>>  	debugfs_create_u32_array("mask", 0444, queue->debugfs_instance,
>>  				 &queue->dfs_bitmap);
>>  
>> +	mutex_unlock(&ptp->tsevq_mux);
>
>The lock doesn't need to be held so long here. Doing so causes a bit of
>an issue, actually, because the memory allocation for the queue can fail
>which will cause the function to return early without releasing the
>mutex.
>
>The lock only needs to be held for the list_add_tail() call.
>
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>>  
>>  int ptp_release(struct posix_clock_context *pccontext)
>>  {
>>  	struct timestamp_event_queue *queue = pccontext->private_clkdata;
>> +	struct ptp_clock *ptp =
>> +		container_of(pccontext->clk, struct ptp_clock, clock);
>>  	unsigned long flags;
>>  
>>  	if (queue) {
>> +		if (mutex_lock_interruptible(&ptp->tsevq_mux)) 
>> +			return -ERESTARTSYS;
>>  		debugfs_remove(queue->debugfs_instance);
>>  		pccontext->private_clkdata = NULL;
>>  		spin_lock_irqsave(&queue->lock, flags);
>> @@ -148,6 +156,7 @@ int ptp_release(struct posix_clock_context *pccontext)
>>  		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&queue->lock, flags);
>>  		bitmap_free(queue->mask);
>>  		kfree(queue);
>> +		mutex_unlock(&ptp->tsevq_mux);
>
>Similar to the above note, you don't want to hold the lock any longer
>than you must.
>
>While this patch looks to cover adding and removing items from the list,
>the code that iterates over the list isn't covered which can be
>problematic. If the list is modified while it is being iterated, the
>iterating code could chase an invalid pointer.
Thanks for your opinions, I will double check it.

Thanks,
edward