From: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Ibrahim Hashimov <security@auditcode.ai>,
akpm <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mark Fasheh <mark@fasheh.com>, Joel Becker <jlbec@evilplan.org>,
ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ocfs2: validate rl_used against rl_count in refcount block validator
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 21:18:52 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b5928876-7962-4dc3-aa5f-ec822d82da8c@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260709132609.44233-1-security@auditcode.ai>
On 7/9/26 9:26 PM, Ibrahim Hashimov wrote:
> ocfs2_find_refcount_rec_in_rl() walks the on-disk refcount record
> array with:
>
> for (; i < le16_to_cpu(rb->rf_records.rl_used); i++) {
> rec = &rb->rf_records.rl_recs[i];
> ...
>
> rl_recs[] lives in a single metadata block (4096 bytes on the common
> configuration), so its real capacity is fixed by
> ocfs2_refcount_recs_per_rb(sb) (247 records for a 4K block with the
> 16-byte ocfs2_refcount_rec). rl_used and rl_count are both read
> directly off disk by ocfs2_validate_refcount_block() and are never
> checked against that capacity, nor against each other, before any
> refcount/reflink/CoW operation walks the array.
>
> A crafted (or corrupted) refcount block with rl_used == 0xffff makes
> the loop above walk far past the end of the block, dereferencing
> rl_recs[i] for i up to 65534. The resulting index is then handed to
> the sibling ocfs2_insert_refcount_rec(), whose insert-shift does:
>
> if (index < le16_to_cpu(rf_list->rl_used))
> memmove(&rf_list->rl_recs[index + 1],
> &rf_list->rl_recs[index],
> (le16_to_cpu(rf_list->rl_used) - index) *
> sizeof(struct ocfs2_refcount_rec));
>
> i.e. a memmove() of up to (0xffff - index) * 16 bytes (~1 MiB) from an
> offset already past the block. This is reachable from an ordinary
> reflink (FICLONE) against a crafted/corrupted ocfs2 image: attaching
> an extent whose cpos sorts past every real record in the leaf forces
> the lookup to run off the end instead of returning early on a match.
> The attacker model is local: CAP_SYS_ADMIN mounting a crafted or
> corrupted ocfs2 image, or a raw write to the block device backing an
> already-mounted ocfs2 filesystem.
>
> ocfs2_validate_refcount_block() already validates the block's ECC,
> signature, rf_blkno and rf_fs_generation, but never rl_count/rl_used
> against the block's actual on-disk capacity. This is the same class
> of gap that ocfs2_validate_extent_block() (fs/ocfs2/alloc.c) already
> closes for the sibling extent-list header, which checks both the
> record capacity and the "used" bound before any code walks
> h_list.l_recs[]:
>
> if (le16_to_cpu(eb->h_list.l_count) != ocfs2_extent_recs_per_eb(sb)) {
> rc = ocfs2_error(...);
> goto bail;
> }
>
> if (le16_to_cpu(eb->h_list.l_next_free_rec) >
> le16_to_cpu(eb->h_list.l_count)) {
> rc = ocfs2_error(...);
> goto bail;
> }
>
> Add the equivalent pair of checks to ocfs2_validate_refcount_block():
> reject a refcount block whose rl_count does not match the fixed
> per-block capacity returned by ocfs2_refcount_recs_per_rb(), and
> reject rl_used > rl_count. Both checks are skipped when
> OCFS2_REFCOUNT_TREE_FL is set, because in that case the same union
> bytes hold an ocfs2_extent_list (rf_list), not the refcount record
> list (rf_records) -- that layout is already validated separately by
> ocfs2_validate_extent_block() when the referenced extent block is
> read. This mirrors the existing
> "!(rb->rf_flags & OCFS2_REFCOUNT_TREE_FL)" guard used elsewhere in
> this file (e.g. ocfs2_get_refcount_rec()) to decide whether
> rf_records or rf_list is the live member of the union.
>
> With this in place, a forged rl_used/rl_count is caught at block
> validation time (ocfs2_error()), consistent with every other
> corruption check in this function, instead of driving an
> out-of-bounds read in ocfs2_find_refcount_rec_in_rl() and a
> subsequent out-of-bounds memmove() in ocfs2_insert_refcount_rec().
>
> Verified against a crafted image on a v6.19 KASAN (KASAN_GENERIC)
> build: replaying the same reflink (FICLONE) reliably hit a KASAN
> report in __ocfs2_increase_refcount()/ocfs2_insert_refcount_rec()
> before this patch, and triggers no report once
> ocfs2_validate_refcount_block() rejects the forged rl_used/rl_count.
>
> Fixes: f2c870e3b12e ("ocfs2: Add ocfs2_read_refcount_block.")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Ibrahim Hashimov <security@auditcode.ai>
> Assisted-by: AuditCode-AI:2026.07
Reviewed-by: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c b/fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c
> index 7323bde70caa..63d6cb326e30 100644
> --- a/fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c
> +++ b/fs/ocfs2/refcounttree.c
> @@ -116,6 +116,33 @@ static int ocfs2_validate_refcount_block(struct super_block *sb,
> le32_to_cpu(rb->rf_fs_generation));
> goto out;
> }
> +
> + /*
> + * rf_records (rl_count/rl_used/rl_recs[]) is only meaningful when
> + * this block is not an interior tree block (OCFS2_REFCOUNT_TREE_FL);
> + * in that case the same union bytes hold an extent list (rf_list)
> + * instead, which is validated by ocfs2_validate_extent_block().
> + */
> + if (!(le32_to_cpu(rb->rf_flags) & OCFS2_REFCOUNT_TREE_FL)) {
> + if (le16_to_cpu(rb->rf_records.rl_count) !=
> + ocfs2_refcount_recs_per_rb(sb)) {
> + rc = ocfs2_error(sb,
> + "Refcount block #%llu has an invalid rl_count of %u\n",
> + (unsigned long long)bh->b_blocknr,
> + le16_to_cpu(rb->rf_records.rl_count));
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + if (le16_to_cpu(rb->rf_records.rl_used) >
> + le16_to_cpu(rb->rf_records.rl_count)) {
> + rc = ocfs2_error(sb,
> + "Refcount block #%llu has an invalid rl_used of %u (rl_count %u)\n",
> + (unsigned long long)bh->b_blocknr,
> + le16_to_cpu(rb->rf_records.rl_used),
> + le16_to_cpu(rb->rf_records.rl_count));
> + goto out;
> + }
> + }
> out:
> return rc;
> }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-10 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-09 13:26 [PATCH] ocfs2: validate rl_used against rl_count in refcount block validator Ibrahim Hashimov
2026-07-10 11:57 ` Joseph Qi
2026-07-10 13:18 ` Joseph Qi [this message]
2026-07-10 20:33 ` Andrew Morton
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=b5928876-7962-4dc3-aa5f-ec822d82da8c@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jlbec@evilplan.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark@fasheh.com \
--cc=ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=security@auditcode.ai \
/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