From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
To: jakub@cloudflare.com, rivendell7@gmail.com, kuniyu@amazon.com
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf 1/5] bpf: sockmap, fix proto update hook to avoid dup calls
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 15:23:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231221232327.43678-2-john.fastabend@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231221232327.43678-1-john.fastabend@gmail.com>
When sockets are added to a sockmap or sockhash we allocate and init a
psock. Then update the proto ops with sock_map_init_proto the flow is
sock_hash_update_common
sock_map_link
psock = sock_map_psock_get_checked() <-returns existing psock
sock_map_init_proto(sk, psock) <- updates sk_proto
If the socket is already in a map this results in the sock_map_init_proto
being called multiple times on the same socket. We do this because when
a socket is added to multiple maps this might result in a new set of BPF
programs being attached to the socket requiring an updated ops struct.
This creates a rule where it must be safe to call psock_update_sk_prot
multiple times. When we added a fix for UAF through unix sockets in patch
4dd9a38a753fc we broke this rule by adding a sock_hold in that path
to ensure the sock is not released. The result is if a af_unix stream sock
is placed in multiple maps it results in a memory leak because we call
sock_hold multiple times with only a single sock_put on it.
Fixes: 4dd9a38a753fc ("bpf: sockmap, fix proto update hook to avoid dup calls")
Rebported-by: Xingwei Lee <xrivendell7@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
---
net/unix/unix_bpf.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/unix/unix_bpf.c b/net/unix/unix_bpf.c
index 7ea7c3a0d0d0..bd84785bf8d6 100644
--- a/net/unix/unix_bpf.c
+++ b/net/unix/unix_bpf.c
@@ -161,15 +161,30 @@ int unix_stream_bpf_update_proto(struct sock *sk, struct sk_psock *psock, bool r
{
struct sock *sk_pair;
+ /* Restore does not decrement the sk_pair reference yet because we must
+ * keep the a reference to the socket until after an RCU grace period
+ * and any pending sends have completed.
+ */
if (restore) {
sk->sk_write_space = psock->saved_write_space;
sock_replace_proto(sk, psock->sk_proto);
return 0;
}
- sk_pair = unix_peer(sk);
- sock_hold(sk_pair);
- psock->sk_pair = sk_pair;
+ /* psock_update_sk_prot can be called multiple times if psock is
+ * added to multiple maps and/or slots in the same map. There is
+ * also an edge case where replacing a psock with itself can trigger
+ * an extra psock_update_sk_prot during the insert process. So it
+ * must be safe to do multiple calls. Here we need to ensure we don't
+ * increment the refcnt through sock_hold many times. There will only
+ * be a single matching destroy operation.
+ */
+ if (!psock->sk_pair) {
+ sk_pair = unix_peer(sk);
+ sock_hold(sk_pair);
+ psock->sk_pair = sk_pair;
+ }
+
unix_stream_bpf_check_needs_rebuild(psock->sk_proto);
sock_replace_proto(sk, &unix_stream_bpf_prot);
return 0;
--
2.33.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-21 23:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-21 23:23 [PATCH bpf 0/5] fix sockmap + stream af_unix memleak John Fastabend
2023-12-21 23:23 ` John Fastabend [this message]
2024-01-02 12:00 ` [PATCH bpf 1/5] bpf: sockmap, fix proto update hook to avoid dup calls Jakub Sitnicki
2024-01-04 1:00 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2024-01-04 3:47 ` John Fastabend
2023-12-21 23:23 ` [PATCH bpf 2/5] bpf: sockmap, added comments describing update proto rules John Fastabend
2023-12-21 23:23 ` [PATCH bpf 3/5] bpf: sockmap, add tests for proto updates many to single map John Fastabend
2023-12-21 23:23 ` [PATCH bpf 4/5] bpf: sockmap, add tests for proto updates single socket to many map John Fastabend
2023-12-21 23:23 ` [PATCH bpf 5/5] bpf: sockmap, add tests for proto updates replace socket John Fastabend
2024-01-02 15:18 ` [PATCH bpf 0/5] fix sockmap + stream af_unix memleak Jakub Sitnicki
2024-01-02 23:49 ` John Fastabend
2024-01-04 1:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20231221232327.43678-2-john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--to=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jakub@cloudflare.com \
--cc=kuniyu@amazon.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rivendell7@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox