From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CD6C15CD46; Wed, 2 Apr 2025 21:34:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743629666; cv=none; b=fY+QjZ8eY9/5p7gLQor12JK1w+BSRDUXaa++u65GlkT/d05BJNalHDO9cx/+jyCk6hB/NHkDGksbAFznkJMHHo2jc1yxfIkkzAIGXZQOqpf3YcqzoRQbTAx72rSYgGh6bBU4/DhaALrn72mgeGBcIi+GDmDYTVxc5G8piqX5BrQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743629666; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WiyRp07KRjQvFYrPtvP7TNMhK2CN2NkL0Ce4/5spsYQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=R2lFPj7fk7zP2nEp1hBz3fQgttZcNcuEhMILuJi7lk7mfw0cjj/LIro6Ms6+ynTnfOkNQoFattBxmd5+m+3qsel5ZsVGcthpmJsIzcccWxxf7OrT0KdFoddj2CFSpmbOhVTBV2WDeHibiQ9hgNSuJKouyYUr0dRV05sUlTUHe3I= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=PfNch3LY; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="PfNch3LY" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 51E15C4CEDD; Wed, 2 Apr 2025 21:34:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1743629665; bh=WiyRp07KRjQvFYrPtvP7TNMhK2CN2NkL0Ce4/5spsYQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=PfNch3LYn76uLKsJHBMZg5CuqcqLzu4IlRLHji4v/M1WEetBHFdys/GZfvCJ6qx4y 6c1lnGmCD84i0+ROtWYIpE+9gUfrRa0H8Ybmj8kxr0VrJlO2YUbM378YqjiGSCs+MR Xmn6VlyE97/QeEyc9UTBrl7rX1enSOX1FRnq5ADU= Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 22:32:58 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Kuniyuki Iwashima Cc: cve@kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, ematsumiya@suse.de, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-net@vger.kernel.org, sfrench@samba.org, smfrench@gmail.com, wangzhaolong1@huawei.com, zhangchangzhong@huawei.com Subject: Re: Fwd: [PATCH][SMB3 client] fix TCP timers deadlock after rmmod Message-ID: <2025040207-yippee-unlearned-4b1c@gregkh> References: <2025040256-spindle-cornea-60ec@gregkh> <20250402205039.9933-1-kuniyu@amazon.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250402205039.9933-1-kuniyu@amazon.com> On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 01:50:05PM -0700, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: > From: Greg KH > Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 21:28:51 +0100 > > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 01:22:11PM -0700, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: > > > From: Greg KH > > > Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 21:15:58 +0100 > > > > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 01:09:19PM -0700, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: > > > > > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman > > > > > Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 16:18:37 +0100 > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 05:15:44PM +0800, Wang Zhaolong wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 12:49:50PM +0800, Wang Zhaolong wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yes, it seems the previous description might not have been entirely clear. > > > > > > > > > I need to clearly point out that this patch, intended as the fix for CVE-2024-54680, > > > > > > > > > does not actually address any real issues. It also fails to resolve the null pointer > > > > > > > > > dereference problem within lockdep. On top of that, it has caused a series of > > > > > > > > > subsequent leakage issues. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If this cve does not actually fix anything, then we can easily reject > > > > > > > > it, please just let us know if that needs to happen here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I can confirm that the patch for CVE-2024-54680 (commit e9f2517a3e18) > > > > > > > should be rejected. Our analysis shows: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. It fails to address the actual null pointer dereference in lockdep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. It introduces multiple serious issues: > > > > > > > 1. A socket leak vulnerability as documented in bugzilla #219972 > > > > > > > 2. Network namespace refcount imbalance issues as described in > > > > > > > bugzilla #219792 (which required the follow-up mainline fix > > > > > > > 4e7f1644f2ac "smb: client: Fix netns refcount imbalance > > > > > > > causing leaks and use-after-free") > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The next thing we should probably do is: > > > > > > > - Reverting e9f2517a3e18 > > > > > > > - Reverting the follow-up fix 4e7f1644f2ac, as it's trying to fix > > > > > > > problems introduced by the problematic CVE patch > > > > > > > > > > > > Great, can you please send patches now for both of these so we can > > > > > > backport them to the stable kernels properly? > > > > > > > > > > Sent to CIFS tree: > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cifs/20250402200319.2834-1-kuniyu@amazon.com/ > > > > > > > > You forgot to add a Cc: stable@ on the patches to ensure that they get > > > > picked up properly for all stable trees :( > > > > > > Ah sorry, I did the same with netdev. netdev patches usually do > > > not have the tag but are backported fine, maybe netdev local rule ? > > > > Nope, that's the "old" way of dealing with netdev patches, the > > documentation was changed years ago, please always put a cc: stable on > > it. Otherwise you are just at the whim of our "hey, I'm board, let's > > look for Fixes: only tags!" script to catch them, which will also never > > notify you of failures. > > Good to know that, thanks! > > My concern was that I could spam the list if I respin the patches, > and incomplete patch could be backported. > > >From stable-kernel-rules.rst, such an accident can be prevented if > someone points out a problem within 48 hours ? > > For example, if v1 is posted with Cc:stable, and a week later > v2 is posted, then the not-yet-upstreamed v1 could be backported ? > Anything can be asked to be applied to stable once it is in Linus's tree, but if you add the cc: stable stuff to the original patch, it will be done automatically for you. That's all, I don't see anything about "48 hours" in that document about submitting patches, that's only in the -rc review cycle portion of the stable releases, not Linus's releases. thanks, greg k-h