From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Ying Xue <ying.xue@windriver.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: use-after-free in sock_wake_async
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 16:43:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87io4q3u8u.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iJgW+6giMUicU1m831+mkaNy9z1hQB-ixvRHBqZo-7Yig@mail.gmail.com> (Eric Dumazet's message of "Tue, 24 Nov 2015 17:18:27 -0800")
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Rainer Weikusat
> <rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com> wrote:
[...]
>> It's also easy to verify: Swap the unix_state_lock and
>> other->sk_data_ready and see if the issue still occurs. Right now (this
>> may change after I had some sleep as it's pretty late for me), I don't
>> think there's another local fix: The ->sk_data_ready accesses a
>> pointer after the lock taken by the code which will clear and
>> then later free it was released.
>
> It seems that :
>
> int sock_wake_async(struct socket *sock, int how, int band)
>
> should really be changed to
>
> int sock_wake_async(struct socket_wq *wq, int how, int band)
>
> So that RCU rules (already present) apply safely.
>
> sk->sk_socket is inherently racy (that is : racy without using
> sk_callback_lock rwlock )
The comment above sock_wait_async states that
/* This function may be called only under socket lock or callback_lock or rcu_lock */
In this case, it's called via sk_wake_async (include/net/sock.h) which
is - in turn - called via sock_def_readable (the 'default' data ready
routine/ net/core/sock.c) which looks like this:
static void sock_def_readable(struct sock *sk)
{
struct socket_wq *wq;
rcu_read_lock();
wq = rcu_dereference(sk->sk_wq);
if (wq_has_sleeper(wq))
wake_up_interruptible_sync_poll(&wq->wait, POLLIN | POLLPRI |
POLLRDNORM | POLLRDBAND);
sk_wake_async(sk, SOCK_WAKE_WAITD, POLL_IN);
rcu_read_unlock();
}
and should thus satisfy the constraint documented by the comment (I
didn't verify if the comment is actually correct, though).
Further - sorry about that - I think changing code in "half of the
network stack" in order to avoid calling a certain routine which will
only ever do something in case someone's using signal-driven I/O with an
already acquired lock held is a terrifying idea. Because of this, I
propose the following alternate patch which should also solve the
problem by ensuring that the ->sk_data_ready activity happens before
unix_release_sock/ sock_release get a chance to clear or free anything
which will be needed.
In case this demonstrably causes other issues, a more complicated
alternate idea (still restricting itself to changes to the af_unix code)
would be to move the socket_wq structure to a dummy struct socket
allocated by unix_release_sock and freed by the destructor.
---
diff --git a/net/unix/af_unix.c b/net/unix/af_unix.c
index 4e95bdf..5c87ea6 100644
--- a/net/unix/af_unix.c
+++ b/net/unix/af_unix.c
@@ -1754,8 +1754,8 @@ restart_locked:
skb_queue_tail(&other->sk_receive_queue, skb);
if (max_level > unix_sk(other)->recursion_level)
unix_sk(other)->recursion_level = max_level;
- unix_state_unlock(other);
other->sk_data_ready(other);
+ unix_state_unlock(other);
sock_put(other);
scm_destroy(&scm);
return len;
@@ -1860,8 +1860,8 @@ static int unix_stream_sendmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg,
skb_queue_tail(&other->sk_receive_queue, skb);
if (max_level > unix_sk(other)->recursion_level)
unix_sk(other)->recursion_level = max_level;
- unix_state_unlock(other);
other->sk_data_ready(other);
+ unix_state_unlock(other);
sent += size;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-25 16:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-24 14:18 use-after-free in sock_wake_async Dmitry Vyukov
2015-11-24 15:21 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-24 15:39 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-24 21:30 ` Jason Baron
2015-11-24 21:40 ` Al Viro
2015-11-24 21:45 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2015-11-24 22:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-24 22:12 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-24 23:34 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-24 23:43 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 1:10 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 1:16 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 1:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 2:28 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 5:43 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 14:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 16:43 ` Rainer Weikusat [this message]
2015-11-25 17:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 17:30 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 17:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 18:24 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 18:39 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 19:38 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 19:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 20:23 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 20:57 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-11-25 22:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 22:32 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-25 22:43 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-25 22:52 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-26 13:32 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-26 14:31 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-26 15:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-26 17:03 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-26 17:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-11-26 17:15 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2015-11-26 17:29 ` Eric Dumazet
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=87io4q3u8u.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com \
--to=rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com \
--cc=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
--cc=kcc@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.com \
--cc=syzkaller@googlegroups.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=ying.xue@windriver.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).