From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Ying Xue <ying.xue@windriver.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: use-after-free in sock_wake_async
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 16:43:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87io4q3u8u.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iJgW+6giMUicU1m831+mkaNy9z1hQB-ixvRHBqZo-7Yig@mail.gmail.com> (Eric Dumazet's message of "Tue, 24 Nov 2015 17:18:27 -0800")
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Rainer Weikusat
> <rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com> wrote:
[...]
>> It's also easy to verify: Swap the unix_state_lock and
>> other->sk_data_ready and see if the issue still occurs. Right now (this
>> may change after I had some sleep as it's pretty late for me), I don't
>> think there's another local fix: The ->sk_data_ready accesses a
>> pointer after the lock taken by the code which will clear and
>> then later free it was released.
>
> It seems that :
>
> int sock_wake_async(struct socket *sock, int how, int band)
>
> should really be changed to
>
> int sock_wake_async(struct socket_wq *wq, int how, int band)
>
> So that RCU rules (already present) apply safely.
>
> sk->sk_socket is inherently racy (that is : racy without using
> sk_callback_lock rwlock )
The comment above sock_wait_async states that
/* This function may be called only under socket lock or callback_lock or rcu_lock */
In this case, it's called via sk_wake_async (include/net/sock.h) which
is - in turn - called via sock_def_readable (the 'default' data ready
routine/ net/core/sock.c) which looks like this:
static void sock_def_readable(struct sock *sk)
{
struct socket_wq *wq;
rcu_read_lock();
wq = rcu_dereference(sk->sk_wq);
if (wq_has_sleeper(wq))
wake_up_interruptible_sync_poll(&wq->wait, POLLIN | POLLPRI |
POLLRDNORM | POLLRDBAND);
sk_wake_async(sk, SOCK_WAKE_WAITD, POLL_IN);
rcu_read_unlock();
}
and should thus satisfy the constraint documented by the comment (I
didn't verify if the comment is actually correct, though).
Further - sorry about that - I think changing code in "half of the
network stack" in order to avoid calling a certain routine which will
only ever do something in case someone's using signal-driven I/O with an
already acquired lock held is a terrifying idea. Because of this, I
propose the following alternate patch which should also solve the
problem by ensuring that the ->sk_data_ready activity happens before
unix_release_sock/ sock_release get a chance to clear or free anything
which will be needed.
In case this demonstrably causes other issues, a more complicated
alternate idea (still restricting itself to changes to the af_unix code)
would be to move the socket_wq structure to a dummy struct socket
allocated by unix_release_sock and freed by the destructor.
---
diff --git a/net/unix/af_unix.c b/net/unix/af_unix.c
index 4e95bdf..5c87ea6 100644
--- a/net/unix/af_unix.c
+++ b/net/unix/af_unix.c
@@ -1754,8 +1754,8 @@ restart_locked:
skb_queue_tail(&other->sk_receive_queue, skb);
if (max_level > unix_sk(other)->recursion_level)
unix_sk(other)->recursion_level = max_level;
- unix_state_unlock(other);
other->sk_data_ready(other);
+ unix_state_unlock(other);
sock_put(other);
scm_destroy(&scm);
return len;
@@ -1860,8 +1860,8 @@ static int unix_stream_sendmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg,
skb_queue_tail(&other->sk_receive_queue, skb);
if (max_level > unix_sk(other)->recursion_level)
unix_sk(other)->recursion_level = max_level;
- unix_state_unlock(other);
other->sk_data_ready(other);
+ unix_state_unlock(other);
sent += size;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-25 16:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-24 14:18 use-after-free in sock_wake_async Dmitry Vyukov
2015-11-24 15:21 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-24 15:39 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-24 21:30 ` Jason Baron
2015-11-24 21:40 ` Al Viro
2015-11-24 21:45 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2015-11-24 22:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-24 22:12 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-24 23:34 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-24 23:43 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 1:10 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 1:16 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 1:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 2:28 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 5:43 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 14:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 16:43 ` Rainer Weikusat [this message]
2015-11-25 17:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 17:30 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 17:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 18:24 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 18:39 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 19:38 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 19:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 20:23 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 20:57 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 22:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 22:32 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-25 22:43 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 22:52 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-26 13:32 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-26 14:31 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-26 15:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-26 17:03 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-26 17:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-26 17:15 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-26 17:29 ` Eric Dumazet
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=87io4q3u8u.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com \
--to=rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com \
--cc=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
--cc=kcc@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.com \
--cc=syzkaller@googlegroups.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=ying.xue@windriver.com \
/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.