From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: [PATCH net] net: read dev->needs_free_netdev before potentially freeing dev
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 22:06:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200824200650.21982-1-Jason@zx2c4.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200824141519.GA223008@mwanda>
If dev->needs_free_netdev is true, it means that netdev_run_todo should
call free_netdev(dev) after it calls dev->priv_destructor. If
dev->needs_free_netdev is false, then it means that either
dev->priv_destructor is taking care of calling free_netdev(dev), or
something else, elsewhere, is doing that. In this case, branching on
"if (dev->needs_free_netdev)" after calling dev->priv_destructor is a
potential UaF. This patch fixes the issue by reading
dev->needs_free_netdev before calling dev->priv_destructor.
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Fixes: cf124db566e6 ("net: Fix inconsistent teardown and release of private netdev state.")
Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
---
I believe that the bug Dan reported would easily be fixed as well by
just setting dev->needs_free_netdev=true and removing the call to
free_netdev(dev) in wg_destruct, in wireguard. If you think that this is
the more proper fix -- and that the problem actually isn't this flow in
dev.c and any code that might hit this UaF is wrong -- let me know and
I'll send in a patch for wireguard instead.
net/core/dev.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
index 7df6c9617321..abe53c2fae8c 100644
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -10073,6 +10073,8 @@ void netdev_run_todo(void)
while (!list_empty(&list)) {
struct net_device *dev
= list_first_entry(&list, struct net_device, todo_list);
+ bool needs_free_netdev = dev->needs_free_netdev;
+
list_del(&dev->todo_list);
if (unlikely(dev->reg_state != NETREG_UNREGISTERING)) {
@@ -10097,7 +10099,7 @@ void netdev_run_todo(void)
#endif
if (dev->priv_destructor)
dev->priv_destructor(dev);
- if (dev->needs_free_netdev)
+ if (needs_free_netdev)
free_netdev(dev);
/* Report a network device has been unregistered */
--
2.28.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-24 20:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20200824141519.GA223008@mwanda>
2020-08-24 19:52 ` [bug report] net: WireGuard secure network tunnel Jason A. Donenfeld
2020-08-24 20:06 ` Jason A. Donenfeld [this message]
2020-08-24 20:35 ` [PATCH net] net: read dev->needs_free_netdev before potentially freeing dev Jason A. Donenfeld
2020-08-25 8:24 ` Dan Carpenter
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=20200824200650.21982-1-Jason@zx2c4.com \
--to=jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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