All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: yebin <yebin@huaweicloud.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
	tytso@mit.edu, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 2/2] ext4: fix out-of-bound read in ext4_xattr_inode_dec_ref_all()
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2025 09:52:12 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <67A6B8CC.8000809@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e2sijmndq76k73e2oemcays4bgfl6ujvlgux3iocg5jigkvy3z@cxmfbh3i7nbc>



On 2025/2/7 20:34, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Fri 07-02-25 17:31:49, yebin wrote:
>> On 2025/2/7 12:16, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 11:27:43AM +0800, Ye Bin wrote:
>>>> From: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
>>>>
>>>> There's issue as follows:
>>>> BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in ext4_xattr_inode_dec_ref_all+0x6ff/0x790
>>>> Read of size 4 at addr ffff88807b003000 by task syz-executor.0/15172
>>>>
>>>> CPU: 3 PID: 15172 Comm: syz-executor.0
>>>> Call Trace:
>>>>    __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:82 [inline]
>>>>    dump_stack+0xbe/0xfd lib/dump_stack.c:123
>>>>    print_address_description.constprop.0+0x1e/0x280 mm/kasan/report.c:400
>>>>    __kasan_report.cold+0x6c/0x84 mm/kasan/report.c:560
>>>>    kasan_report+0x3a/0x50 mm/kasan/report.c:585
>>>>    ext4_xattr_inode_dec_ref_all+0x6ff/0x790 fs/ext4/xattr.c:1137
>>>>    ext4_xattr_delete_inode+0x4c7/0xda0 fs/ext4/xattr.c:2896
>>>>    ext4_evict_inode+0xb3b/0x1670 fs/ext4/inode.c:323
>>>>    evict+0x39f/0x880 fs/inode.c:622
>>>>    iput_final fs/inode.c:1746 [inline]
>>>>    iput fs/inode.c:1772 [inline]
>>>>    iput+0x525/0x6c0 fs/inode.c:1758
>>>>    ext4_orphan_cleanup fs/ext4/super.c:3298 [inline]
>>>>    ext4_fill_super+0x8c57/0xba40 fs/ext4/super.c:5300
>>>>    mount_bdev+0x355/0x410 fs/super.c:1446
>>>>    legacy_get_tree+0xfe/0x220 fs/fs_context.c:611
>>>>    vfs_get_tree+0x8d/0x2f0 fs/super.c:1576
>>>>    do_new_mount fs/namespace.c:2983 [inline]
>>>>    path_mount+0x119a/0x1ad0 fs/namespace.c:3316
>>>>    do_mount+0xfc/0x110 fs/namespace.c:3329
>>>>    __do_sys_mount fs/namespace.c:3540 [inline]
>>>>    __se_sys_mount+0x219/0x2e0 fs/namespace.c:3514
>>>>    do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 arch/x86/entry/common.c:46
>>>>    entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x67/0xd1
>>>>
>>>> Memory state around the buggy address:
>>>>    ffff88807b002f00: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>>>    ffff88807b002f80: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>>>>> ffff88807b003000: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
>>>>                      ^
>>>>    ffff88807b003080: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
>>>>    ffff88807b003100: ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
>>>>
>>>> Above issue happens as ext4_xattr_delete_inode() isn't check xattr
>>>> is valid if xattr is in inode.
>>>> To solve above issue call xattr_check_inode() check if xattr if valid
>>>> in inode.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: e50e5129f384 ("ext4: xattr-in-inode support")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ye Bin <yebin10@huawei.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    fs/ext4/xattr.c | 14 +++++++++++---
>>>>    1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/ext4/xattr.c b/fs/ext4/xattr.c
>>>> index 0e4494863d15..cb724477f8da 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/ext4/xattr.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/ext4/xattr.c
>>>> @@ -2922,7 +2922,6 @@ int ext4_xattr_delete_inode(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
>>>>    			    int extra_credits)
>>>>    {
>>>>    	struct buffer_head *bh = NULL;
>>>> -	struct ext4_xattr_ibody_header *header;
>>>>    	struct ext4_iloc iloc = { .bh = NULL };
>>>>    	struct ext4_xattr_entry *entry;
>>>>    	struct inode *ea_inode;
>>>> @@ -2937,6 +2936,9 @@ int ext4_xattr_delete_inode(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
>>>>
>>>>    	if (ext4_has_feature_ea_inode(inode->i_sb) &&
>>>>    	    ext4_test_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_XATTR)) {
>>>> +		struct ext4_xattr_ibody_header *header;
>>>> +		struct ext4_inode *raw_inode;
>>>> +		void *end;
>>>>
>>>>    		error = ext4_get_inode_loc(inode, &iloc);
>>>>    		if (error) {
>>>> @@ -2952,14 +2954,20 @@ int ext4_xattr_delete_inode(handle_t *handle, struct inode *inode,
>>>>    			goto cleanup;
>>>>    		}
>>>>
>>>> -		header = IHDR(inode, ext4_raw_inode(&iloc));
>>>> -		if (header->h_magic == cpu_to_le32(EXT4_XATTR_MAGIC))
>>>> +		raw_inode = ext4_raw_inode(&iloc);
>>>> +		header = IHDR(inode, raw_inode);
>>>> +		end = ITAIL(inode, raw_inode);
>>>> +		if (header->h_magic == cpu_to_le32(EXT4_XATTR_MAGIC)) {
>>>
>>> This needs to make sure that header + sizeof(h_magic) >= end before
>>> checking the magic number in header::h_magic, right?
>>>
>>> --D
>> Thank you for your reply.
>> There ' s no need to check "header + sizeof(h_magic) >= end" because it has
>> been checked
>> when the EXT4_STATE_XATTR flag bit is set:
>> __ext4_iget
>>    ret = ext4_iget_extra_inode(inode, raw_inode, ei);
>>      if (EXT4_INODE_HAS_XATTR_SPACE(inode) && *magic ==
>> cpu_to_le32(EXT4_XATTR_MAGIC))
>>        ext4_set_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_XATTR);
>> It seems that the judgment of "header->h_magic ==
>> cpu_to_le32(EXT4_XATTR_MAGIC)"
>> should be redundant here.
>
> Yes, if we have EXT4_STATE_XATTR set, xattr_check_inode() should be safe to
> call (ext4_iget_extra_inode() makes sure inode space is sane) and should
> return success. I'm actually wondering whether it wouldn't be better for
> ext4_iget_extra_inode() to check xattr validity with xattr_check_inode()
> along with setting EXT4_STATE_XATTR. So we'd be checking xattr validity
> when loading from disk similarly as for xattr blocks which is a well
> defined place. When doing the checking on use (as we do now) it is always
> easy to miss some place...
>
> 								Honza

It's actually better. I'll revise it and post it again.

>
>>>> +			error = xattr_check_inode(inode, header, end);
>>>> +			if (error)
>>>> +				goto cleanup;
>>>>    			ext4_xattr_inode_dec_ref_all(handle, inode, iloc.bh,
>>>>    						     IFIRST(header),
>>>>    						     false /* block_csum */,
>>>>    						     ea_inode_array,
>>>>    						     extra_credits,
>>>>    						     false /* skip_quota */);
>>>> +		}
>>>>    	}
>>>>
>>>>    	if (EXT4_I(inode)->i_file_acl) {
>>>> --
>>>> 2.34.1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>


      reply	other threads:[~2025-02-08  1:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-07  3:27 [RESEND PATCH 0/2] ext4: fix out-of-bound read in ext4_xattr_inode_dec_ref_all() Ye Bin
2025-02-07  3:27 ` [RESEND PATCH 1/2] ext4: introduce ITAIL helper Ye Bin
2025-02-07  4:15   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-07  3:27 ` [RESEND PATCH 2/2] ext4: fix out-of-bound read in ext4_xattr_inode_dec_ref_all() Ye Bin
2025-02-07  4:16   ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-07  9:31     ` yebin
2025-02-07 12:34       ` Jan Kara
2025-02-08  1:52         ` yebin [this message]

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=67A6B8CC.8000809@huaweicloud.com \
    --to=yebin@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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.