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]
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:49:06 -0700
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
To: <mhal@...x.co>
CC: <cong.wang@...edance.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	<kuba@...nel.org>, <kuni1840@...il.com>, <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net 01/15] af_unix: Set sk->sk_state under unix_state_lock() for truly disconencted peer.

From: Michal Luczaj <mhal@...x.co>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:55:08 +0200
> On 6/9/24 23:03, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> > (...)
> > Sorry, I think I was wrong and we can't use smp_store_release()
> > and smp_load_acquire(), and smp_[rw]mb() is needed.
> > 
> > Given we avoid adding code in the hotpath in the original fix
> > 8866730aed510 [0], I prefer adding unix_state_lock() in the SOCKMAP
> > path again.
> >
> > [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/6545bc9f7e443_3358c208ae@john.notmuch/
> 
> You're saying smp_wmb() in connect() is too much for the hot path, do I
> understand correctly?

Yes, and now I think WARN_ON_ONCE() would be enough because it's unlikely
that the delay happens between the two store ops and concurrent bpf()
is in progress.

If syzkaller was able to hit this on vanilla kernel, we can revisit.

Then, probably we could just do s/WARN_ON_ONCE/unlikely/ because users
who call bpf() in such a way know that the state was TCP_CLOSE while
calling bpf().

---8<---
diff --git a/net/unix/unix_bpf.c b/net/unix/unix_bpf.c
index bd84785bf8d6..46dc747349f2 100644
--- a/net/unix/unix_bpf.c
+++ b/net/unix/unix_bpf.c
@@ -181,6 +181,9 @@ int unix_stream_bpf_update_proto(struct sock *sk, struct sk_psock *psock, bool r
 	 */
 	if (!psock->sk_pair) {
 		sk_pair = unix_peer(sk);
+		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!sk_pair))
+			return -EINVAL;
+
 		sock_hold(sk_pair);
 		psock->sk_pair = sk_pair;
 	}
---8<---

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ