From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Lukas Lueg <lukas.lueg@gmail.com>
Cc: <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Add extra check for sub_stripes to avoid hostile 0 division attack.
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:21:39 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55388F73.8060000@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJF-kYnhho8RA3WyVfC6oQZXfdcNJ+7Wud6LJBBeKrEovsVfdQ@mail.gmail.com>
IMHO Zeroing the RAID10 bit is not a good idea to "repair".
As in that case, since the csum matched, normally we should trust
whatever we read. But if RAID10 bit is set but sub_stripe is still 0,
we are not sure whether the RAID10 bit or the sub_stripe value is wrong.
So what we know is, something unexpected happened. Normally
we will call a BUG_ON(), but that will crash the kernel anyway, so we
can only return -EINVAL and abort the mount process.
Thanks,
Qu
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Add extra check for sub_stripes to avoid
hostile 0 division attack.
From: Lukas Lueg <lukas.lueg@gmail.com>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: 2015年04月23日 14:07
> I didn't check but "repair" should be made able to fix this situation
> on an existing fs fairly easily by zeroing the BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10-bit
> in case sub_stripes is zero or some unreasonable number and set the
> bit in case sub_stripes has a reasonable, small value.
>
> 2015-04-23 5:00 GMT+02:00 Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>:
>> Although only RAID10 use sub_stripes, a hostile attack can modify chunk
>> tree and just add RAID10 bit to a single chunk.
>> Then btrfs_map_block will trigger a 0 division in kernel and destroy
>> everything.
>>
>> Just add extra check when reading chunk from disk.
>>
>> Reported-by: Lukas Lueg <lukas.lueg@gmail.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> ---
>> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 8 ++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> index 8222f6f..a764726 100644
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> @@ -6061,6 +6061,14 @@ static int read_one_chunk(struct btrfs_root *root, struct btrfs_key *key,
>> map->stripe_len = btrfs_chunk_stripe_len(leaf, chunk);
>> map->type = btrfs_chunk_type(leaf, chunk);
>> map->sub_stripes = btrfs_chunk_sub_stripes(leaf, chunk);
>> +
>> + /* Add extra check to avoid hostile 0 division attack */
>> + if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10 &&
>> + map->sub_stripes == 0) {
>> + free_extent_map(em);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> for (i = 0; i < num_stripes; i++) {
>> map->stripes[i].physical =
>> btrfs_stripe_offset_nr(leaf, chunk, i);
>> --
>> 2.3.5
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-23 6:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-23 3:00 [PATCH] btrfs: Add extra check for sub_stripes to avoid hostile 0 division attack Qu Wenruo
2015-04-23 6:07 ` Lukas Lueg
2015-04-23 6:21 ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2015-04-23 16:26 ` David Sterba
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=55388F73.8060000@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas.lueg@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