netdev - Re: [PATCH net] udp: fix segmentation crash for GRO packet without fraglist

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: <5cc1c662-1cec-101c-8184-c32c210eeadc@iogearbox.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 12:15:20 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Lena Wang (王娜) <Lena.Wang@...iatek.com>,
 "maze@...gle.com" <maze@...gle.com>,
 "willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com" <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
 "steffen.klassert@...unet.com" <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
 "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Shiming Cheng (成诗明)
 <Shiming.Cheng@...iatek.com>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 "matthias.bgg@...il.com" <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
 "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 "yan@...udflare.com" <yan@...udflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] udp: fix segmentation crash for GRO packet without
 fraglist

On 4/28/24 9:48 AM, Lena Wang (王娜) wrote:
> On Sat, 2024-04-27 at 09:28 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>   	
>> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
>> you have verified the sender or the content.
>>   
>> Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>>> On 4/26/24 11:52 AM, Lena Wang (王娜) wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>>>   From 301da5c9d65652bac6091d4cd64b751b3338f8bb Mon Sep 17
>> 00:00:00
>>>>> 2001
>>>>>> From: Shiming Cheng <shiming.cheng@...iatek.com>
>>>>>> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 13:42:35 +0800
>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH net] net: prevent BPF pulling SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST
>> skb
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST skb can't be pulled data
>>>>>> from its fraglist as it may result an invalid
>>>>>> segmentation or kernel exception.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For such structured skb we limit the BPF pulling
>>>>>> data length smaller than skb_headlen() and return
>>>>>> error if exceeding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 3a1296a38d0c ("net: Support GRO/GSO fraglist chaining.")
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Shiming Cheng <shiming.cheng@...iatek.com>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lena Wang <lena.wang@...iatek.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>    net/core/filter.c | 5 +++++
>>>>>>    1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
>>>>>> index 8adf95765cdd..8ed4d5d87167 100644
>>>>>> --- a/net/core/filter.c
>>>>>> +++ b/net/core/filter.c
>>>>>> @@ -1662,6 +1662,11 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct
>> bpf_scratchpad,
>>>>>> bpf_sp);
>>>>>>    static inline int __bpf_try_make_writable(struct sk_buff
>> *skb,
>>>>>>      unsigned int write_len)
>>>>>>    {
>>>>>> +if (skb_is_gso(skb) &&
>>>>>> +    (skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type & SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST) &&
>>>>>> +     write_len > skb_headlen(skb)) {
>>>>>> +return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>    return skb_ensure_writable(skb, write_len);
>>>
>>> Dumb question, but should this guard be more generically part of
>> skb_ensure_writable()
>>> internals, presumably that would be inside pskb_may_pull_reason(),
>> or only if we ever
>>> see more code instances similar to this?
>>
>> Good point. Most callers of skb_ensure_writable correctly pull only
>> headers, so wouldn't cause this problem. But it also adds coverage to
>> things like tc pedit.
> 
> Updated:
> 
>  From 3be30b8cf6e629f2615ef4eafe3b2a1c0d68c530 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Shiming Cheng <shiming.cheng@...iatek.com>
> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2024 15:03:12 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH net] net: prevent pulling SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST skb
> 
> BPF or TC callers may pull in a length longer than skb_headlen()
> for a SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST skb. The data in fraglist will be pulled
> into the linear space. However it destroys the skb's structure
> and may result in an invalid segmentation or kernel exception.
> 
> So we should add protection to stop the operation and return
> error to remind callers.
> 
> Fixes: 3a1296a38d0c ("net: Support GRO/GSO fraglist chaining.")
> Signed-off-by: Shiming Cheng <shiming.cheng@...iatek.com>
> Signed-off-by: Lena Wang <lena.wang@...iatek.com>
> ---
>   include/linux/skbuff.h | 6 ++++++
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> index 9d24aec064e8..3eef65b3db24 100644
> --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
> +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> @@ -2740,6 +2740,12 @@ pskb_may_pull_reason(struct sk_buff *skb,
> unsigned int len)
>   	if (unlikely(len > skb->len))
>   		return SKB_DROP_REASON_PKT_TOO_SMALL;
>   
> +	if (skb_is_gso(skb) &&
> +	    (skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type & SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST) &&
> +	     write_len > skb_headlen(skb)) {
> +		return SKB_DROP_REASON_NOMEM;
> +	}

The 'write_len > skb_headlen(skb)' test is redundant, no ?

It is covered by the earlier test :

         if (likely(len <= skb_headlen(skb)))
                 return SKB_NOT_DROPPED_YET;

Also, was this patch even compile tested since there is no write_len var ?

>   	if (unlikely(!__pskb_pull_tail(skb, len - skb_headlen(skb))))
>   		return SKB_DROP_REASON_NOMEM;
>   
>