From: "Nuernberger, Stefan" <snu@amazon.de>
To: "boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com" <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "jgross@suse.com" <jgross@suse.com>,
"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
"ross.lagerwall@citrix.com" <ross.lagerwall@citrix.com>,
"Seidel, Conny" <consei@amazon.de>,
"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
"Dannowski, Uwe" <uwed@amazon.de>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/pciback: Prevent NULL pointer dereference in quirks_show
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 18:16:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1575915416.21160.49.camel@amazon.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4bc83b82-427f-2215-3161-5776867675a1@oracle.com>
On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 15:15 -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 12/6/19 1:09 PM, Nuernberger, Stefan wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 10:11 -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> > >
> > > On 12/6/19 8:48 AM, Stefan Nuernberger wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: Uwe Dannowski <uwed@amazon.de>
> > > >
> > > > list_for_each_entry(cfg_entry, &dev_data-
> > > > >
> > > > > config_fields, list) {
> > > Couldn't you have the same race here?
> > Not quite the same, but it might not be entirely safe yet. The
> > 'quirks_show' takes the 'device_ids_lock' and races with unbind /
> > 'pcistub_device_release' "which takes device_lock mutex". So this
> > might
> > now be a UAF read access instead of a NULL pointer dereference.
> Yes, that's what I meant (although I don't see much difference in
> this
> context).
Well, the NULL ptr access causes an instant kernel panic whereas we
have not attributed crashes to the possible UAF read until now.
> >
> > We have
> > not observed adversarial effects in our testing (compared to the
> > obvious issues with NULL pointer) but that's not a guarantee of
> > course.
> >
> > So should quirks_show actually be protected by pcistub_devices_lock
> > instead as are other functions that access dev_data? Does it need
> > both
> > locks in that case?
> device_ids_lock protects device_ids list, which is not what you are
> trying to access, so that doesn't look like right lock to hold. And
> AFAICT pcistub_devices_lock is not held when device data is cleared
> in
> pcistub_device_release() (which I think is where we are racing).
Indeed. The xen_pcibk_quirks list does not have a separate lock to
protect it. It's either modified under 'pcistub_devices_lock', from
pcistub_remove(), or iterated over with the 'device_ids_lock' held in
quirks_show(). Also the quirks list is amended from
pcistub_init_device()
-> xen_pcibk_config_init_dev()
-> xen_pcibk_config_quirks_init()
without holding any lock at all. In fact the
pcistub_init_devices_late() and pcistub_seize() functions deliberately
release the pcistub_devices_lock before calling pcistub_init_device().
This looks broken.
The race is between
pcistub_remove()
-> pcistub_device_put()
-> pcistub_device_release()
on one side and the quirks_show() on the other side. The problematic
quirk is freed from the xen_pcibk_quirks list in pcistub_remove() early
on under pcistub_devices_lock before the associated dev_data is freed
eventually. So switching from device_ids_lock to pcistub_devices_lock
in quirks_show() could be sufficient to always have valid dev_data for
all quirks in the list.
There is also pcistub_put_pci_dev() possibly in the race, called from
xen_pcibk_remove_device(), or xen_pcibk_xenbus_remove(), or
pcistub_remove(). The pcistub_remove() call site is safe when we switch
to pcistub_devices_lock (same reasoning as above). For the others I
currently do not see when the quirks are ever freed?
- Stefan
Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
Krausenstr. 38
10117 Berlin
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Christian Schlaeger, Ralf Herbrich
Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg unter HRB 149173 B
Sitz: Berlin
Ust-ID: DE 289 237 879
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Nuernberger, Stefan" <snu@amazon.de>
To: "boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com" <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "Seidel, Conny" <consei@amazon.de>,
"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
"jgross@suse.com" <jgross@suse.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
"ross.lagerwall@citrix.com" <ross.lagerwall@citrix.com>,
"Dannowski, Uwe" <uwed@amazon.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/pciback: Prevent NULL pointer dereference in quirks_show
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 18:16:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1575915416.21160.49.camel@amazon.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4bc83b82-427f-2215-3161-5776867675a1@oracle.com>
On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 15:15 -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 12/6/19 1:09 PM, Nuernberger, Stefan wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 10:11 -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> > >
> > > On 12/6/19 8:48 AM, Stefan Nuernberger wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: Uwe Dannowski <uwed@amazon.de>
> > > >
> > > > list_for_each_entry(cfg_entry, &dev_data-
> > > > >
> > > > > config_fields, list) {
> > > Couldn't you have the same race here?
> > Not quite the same, but it might not be entirely safe yet. The
> > 'quirks_show' takes the 'device_ids_lock' and races with unbind /
> > 'pcistub_device_release' "which takes device_lock mutex". So this
> > might
> > now be a UAF read access instead of a NULL pointer dereference.
> Yes, that's what I meant (although I don't see much difference in
> this
> context).
Well, the NULL ptr access causes an instant kernel panic whereas we
have not attributed crashes to the possible UAF read until now.
> >
> > We have
> > not observed adversarial effects in our testing (compared to the
> > obvious issues with NULL pointer) but that's not a guarantee of
> > course.
> >
> > So should quirks_show actually be protected by pcistub_devices_lock
> > instead as are other functions that access dev_data? Does it need
> > both
> > locks in that case?
> device_ids_lock protects device_ids list, which is not what you are
> trying to access, so that doesn't look like right lock to hold. And
> AFAICT pcistub_devices_lock is not held when device data is cleared
> in
> pcistub_device_release() (which I think is where we are racing).
Indeed. The xen_pcibk_quirks list does not have a separate lock to
protect it. It's either modified under 'pcistub_devices_lock', from
pcistub_remove(), or iterated over with the 'device_ids_lock' held in
quirks_show(). Also the quirks list is amended from
pcistub_init_device()
-> xen_pcibk_config_init_dev()
-> xen_pcibk_config_quirks_init()
without holding any lock at all. In fact the
pcistub_init_devices_late() and pcistub_seize() functions deliberately
release the pcistub_devices_lock before calling pcistub_init_device().
This looks broken.
The race is between
pcistub_remove()
-> pcistub_device_put()
-> pcistub_device_release()
on one side and the quirks_show() on the other side. The problematic
quirk is freed from the xen_pcibk_quirks list in pcistub_remove() early
on under pcistub_devices_lock before the associated dev_data is freed
eventually. So switching from device_ids_lock to pcistub_devices_lock
in quirks_show() could be sufficient to always have valid dev_data for
all quirks in the list.
There is also pcistub_put_pci_dev() possibly in the race, called from
xen_pcibk_remove_device(), or xen_pcibk_xenbus_remove(), or
pcistub_remove(). The pcistub_remove() call site is safe when we switch
to pcistub_devices_lock (same reasoning as above). For the others I
currently do not see when the quirks are ever freed?
- Stefan
Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
Krausenstr. 38
10117 Berlin
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Christian Schlaeger, Ralf Herbrich
Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg unter HRB 149173 B
Sitz: Berlin
Ust-ID: DE 289 237 879
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-09 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-06 13:48 [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/pciback: Prevent NULL pointer dereference in quirks_show Stefan Nuernberger
2019-12-06 13:48 ` Stefan Nuernberger
2019-12-06 15:11 ` [Xen-devel] " Boris Ostrovsky
2019-12-06 15:11 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2019-12-06 18:09 ` [Xen-devel] " Nuernberger, Stefan
2019-12-06 18:09 ` Nuernberger, Stefan
2019-12-06 20:15 ` [Xen-devel] " Boris Ostrovsky
2019-12-06 20:15 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2019-12-09 18:16 ` Nuernberger, Stefan [this message]
2019-12-09 18:16 ` Nuernberger, Stefan
2019-12-09 21:21 ` [Xen-devel] " Boris Ostrovsky
2019-12-09 21:21 ` Boris Ostrovsky
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1575915416.21160.49.camel@amazon.de \
--to=snu@amazon.de \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=consei@amazon.de \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ross.lagerwall@citrix.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=uwed@amazon.de \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.