From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Yehyeong Lee" <yhlee@isslab.korea.ac.kr>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: libiscsi: validate the ITT reflected in a Reject PDU
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2026 11:07:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260803110726.45F781F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260803104149.2114414-1-yhlee@isslab.korea.ac.kr>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:
New issues:
- [High] The newly added task validation logic in `iscsi_handle_reject` introduces a Time-of-Check to Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) data race against concurrent task allocation.
Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] The vulnerability preventing malicious target completion of in-flight SCSI commands or free tasks is only patched for `ISCSI_OP_REJECT`, leaving other management opcodes vulnerable to the exact same exploit.
- [Critical] Negative ITT values bypass bounds checking when using drivers like be2iscsi, leading to an out-of-bounds array access on the session cmds array.
- [High] The patch prevents spoofed Reject PDUs from erroneously completing SCSI tasks by checking `!task->sc`, but leaves non-SCSI management tasks (e.g., TMFs, Logout) vulnerable to a double-completion exploit via reallocation.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH] scsi: libiscsi: validate the ITT reflected in a Reject PDU ---
commit bf6ef027cf2ac528cf92e9e76e0a750fc88ecc70
Author: Yehyeong Lee <yhlee@isslab.korea.ac.kr>
Subject: scsi: libiscsi: validate the ITT reflected in a Reject PDU
This commit addresses an issue where an invalid ITT in a Reject PDU could
cause a null pointer dereference or complete an active task incorrectly.
It adds a check in iscsi_handle_reject to verify the ITT and ensure the
task is valid and is a SCSI command before cleaning it up.
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libiscsi.c b/drivers/scsi/libiscsi.c
> index 6bffd91b973a4..23ae038c54820 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/libiscsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libiscsi.c
> @@ -1089,8 +1089,11 @@ static int iscsi_handle_reject(struct iscsi_conn *conn, struct iscsi_hdr *hdr,
> * Our nop as ping got dropped. We know the target
> * and transport are ok so just clean up
> */
> - task = iscsi_itt_to_task(conn, rejected_pdu.itt);
> - if (!task) {
> + task = NULL;
> + if (!iscsi_verify_itt(conn, rejected_pdu.itt))
[Severity: Critical]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does the new call to
iscsi_verify_itt() properly handle negative ITT values?
When using drivers like be2iscsi, the network ITT is cast to a signed
integer:
drivers/scsi/be2iscsi/be_main.c:beiscsi_parse_pdu() {
...
*index = (int)itt;
...
}
In iscsi_verify_itt() and iscsi_itt_to_task(), the bounds check performs a
signed comparison:
if (i >= session->cmds_max) {
If an ITT with the MSB set (e.g., 0x80000000) is provided, would this
evaluate to false for negative integers and completely bypass the bounds
check, allowing an out-of-bounds access on session->cmds[i]?
> + task = iscsi_itt_to_task(conn, rejected_pdu.itt);
> + if (!task || task->state == ISCSI_TASK_FREE ||
> + task->sc) {
[Severity: High]
Does this unprotected lockless read introduce a Time-of-Check to Time-of-Use
(TOCTOU) data race against concurrent task allocation?
Looking at iscsi_alloc_task(), which runs under frwd_lock, it assigns
task->state before setting task->sc without any memory barriers:
iscsi_alloc_task() {
...
task->state = ISCSI_TASK_PENDING;
task->conn = conn;
task->sc = sc;
...
}
The RX softirq thread here in iscsi_handle_reject() checks task->state and
task->sc without holding the frwd_lock. If a Reject PDU arrives exactly as a
task is allocated, could the RX thread observe task->state ==
ISCSI_TASK_PENDING and task->sc == NULL, causing this check to evaluate to
false and prematurely complete the task via iscsi_nop_out_rsp()?
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does this logic leave non-NOOP management
tasks vulnerable to a double-completion exploit?
Since TMF tasks are allocated from cmdpool but have task->sc == NULL, this
new check evaluates to false for an in-flight non-SCSI management task
(like an Abort TMF).
If a target sends a spoofed Reject PDU with the ITT of an in-flight TMF
task, could iscsi_nop_out_rsp() prematurely complete and free it?
Consequently, if the initiator reallocates this freed task for a legitimate
SCSI command and the target finally sends the actual response for the
original TMF, would the new SCSI command be prematurely completed?
> iscsi_conn_printk(KERN_ERR, conn,
> "Invalid pdu reject. Could "
> "not lookup rejected task.\n");
[Severity: Critical]
This is a pre-existing issue, but is this vulnerability also present for
other management opcodes?
While this patch addresses ISCSI_OP_REJECT, __iscsi_complete_pdu() fetches
the task for other management response opcodes without validating if it is a
free task or an active SCSI command:
__iscsi_complete_pdu() {
...
case ISCSI_OP_LOGOUT_RSP:
case ISCSI_OP_LOGIN_RSP:
case ISCSI_OP_TEXT_RSP:
case ISCSI_OP_SCSI_TMFUNC_RSP:
case ISCSI_OP_NOOP_IN:
task = iscsi_itt_to_task(conn, hdr->itt);
...
}
If a target sends a management response containing the ITT of a free task or
an active SCSI command, could it completely bypass this patch's logic and
be erroneously passed to completion functions?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260803104149.2114414-1-yhlee@isslab.korea.ac.kr?part=1
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-03 11:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-03 10:41 [PATCH] scsi: libiscsi: validate the ITT reflected in a Reject PDU Yehyeong Lee
2026-08-03 11:07 ` sashiko-bot [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=20260803110726.45F781F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=yhlee@isslab.korea.ac.kr \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).