From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: petr.pavlu@suse.com, jarkko@kernel.org, jlee@suse.com
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] keys: Fix linking a duplicate key to a keyring's assoc_array" failed to apply to 5.4-stable tree
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2023 15:53:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2023072356-confirm-embezzle-c962@gregkh> (raw)
The patch below does not apply to the 5.4-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:
git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-5.4.y
git checkout FETCH_HEAD
git cherry-pick -x d55901522f96082a43b9842d34867363c0cdbac5
# <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.>
git commit -s
git send-email --to '<stable@vger.kernel.org>' --in-reply-to '2023072356-confirm-embezzle-c962@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 5.4.y' HEAD^..
Possible dependencies:
d55901522f96 ("keys: Fix linking a duplicate key to a keyring's assoc_array")
f7e47677e39a ("watch_queue: Add a key/keyring notification facility")
0858caa419e6 ("uapi: General notification queue definitions")
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From d55901522f96082a43b9842d34867363c0cdbac5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:04:12 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] keys: Fix linking a duplicate key to a keyring's assoc_array
When making a DNS query inside the kernel using dns_query(), the request
code can in rare cases end up creating a duplicate index key in the
assoc_array of the destination keyring. It is eventually found by
a BUG_ON() check in the assoc_array implementation and results in
a crash.
Example report:
[2158499.700025] kernel BUG at ../lib/assoc_array.c:652!
[2158499.700039] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP PTI
[2158499.700065] CPU: 3 PID: 31985 Comm: kworker/3:1 Kdump: loaded Not tainted 5.3.18-150300.59.90-default #1 SLE15-SP3
[2158499.700096] Hardware name: VMware, Inc. VMware Virtual Platform/440BX Desktop Reference Platform, BIOS 6.00 11/12/2020
[2158499.700351] Workqueue: cifsiod cifs_resolve_server [cifs]
[2158499.700380] RIP: 0010:assoc_array_insert+0x85f/0xa40
[2158499.700401] Code: ff 74 2b 48 8b 3b 49 8b 45 18 4c 89 e6 48 83 e7 fe e8 95 ec 74 00 3b 45 88 7d db 85 c0 79 d4 0f 0b 0f 0b 0f 0b e8 41 f2 be ff <0f> 0b 0f 0b 81 7d 88 ff ff ff 7f 4c 89 eb 4c 8b ad 58 ff ff ff 0f
[2158499.700448] RSP: 0018:ffffc0bd6187faf0 EFLAGS: 00010282
[2158499.700470] RAX: ffff9f1ea7da2fe8 RBX: ffff9f1ea7da2fc1 RCX: 0000000000000005
[2158499.700492] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000005 RDI: 0000000000000000
[2158499.700515] RBP: ffffc0bd6187fbb0 R08: ffff9f185faf1100 R09: 0000000000000000
[2158499.700538] R10: ffff9f1ea7da2cc0 R11: 000000005ed8cec8 R12: ffffc0bd6187fc28
[2158499.700561] R13: ffff9f15feb8d000 R14: ffff9f1ea7da2fc0 R15: ffff9f168dc0d740
[2158499.700585] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff9f185fac0000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[2158499.700610] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[2158499.700630] CR2: 00007fdd94fca238 CR3: 0000000809d8c006 CR4: 00000000003706e0
[2158499.700702] Call Trace:
[2158499.700741] ? key_alloc+0x447/0x4b0
[2158499.700768] ? __key_link_begin+0x43/0xa0
[2158499.700790] __key_link_begin+0x43/0xa0
[2158499.700814] request_key_and_link+0x2c7/0x730
[2158499.700847] ? dns_resolver_read+0x20/0x20 [dns_resolver]
[2158499.700873] ? key_default_cmp+0x20/0x20
[2158499.700898] request_key_tag+0x43/0xa0
[2158499.700926] dns_query+0x114/0x2ca [dns_resolver]
[2158499.701127] dns_resolve_server_name_to_ip+0x194/0x310 [cifs]
[2158499.701164] ? scnprintf+0x49/0x90
[2158499.701190] ? __switch_to_asm+0x40/0x70
[2158499.701211] ? __switch_to_asm+0x34/0x70
[2158499.701405] reconn_set_ipaddr_from_hostname+0x81/0x2a0 [cifs]
[2158499.701603] cifs_resolve_server+0x4b/0xd0 [cifs]
[2158499.701632] process_one_work+0x1f8/0x3e0
[2158499.701658] worker_thread+0x2d/0x3f0
[2158499.701682] ? process_one_work+0x3e0/0x3e0
[2158499.701703] kthread+0x10d/0x130
[2158499.701723] ? kthread_park+0xb0/0xb0
[2158499.701746] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x40
The situation occurs as follows:
* Some kernel facility invokes dns_query() to resolve a hostname, for
example, "abcdef". The function registers its global DNS resolver
cache as current->cred.thread_keyring and passes the query to
request_key_net() -> request_key_tag() -> request_key_and_link().
* Function request_key_and_link() creates a keyring_search_context
object. Its match_data.cmp method gets set via a call to
type->match_preparse() (resolves to dns_resolver_match_preparse()) to
dns_resolver_cmp().
* Function request_key_and_link() continues and invokes
search_process_keyrings_rcu() which returns that a given key was not
found. The control is then passed to request_key_and_link() ->
construct_alloc_key().
* Concurrently to that, a second task similarly makes a DNS query for
"abcdef." and its result gets inserted into the DNS resolver cache.
* Back on the first task, function construct_alloc_key() first runs
__key_link_begin() to determine an assoc_array_edit operation to
insert a new key. Index keys in the array are compared exactly as-is,
using keyring_compare_object(). The operation finds that "abcdef" is
not yet present in the destination keyring.
* Function construct_alloc_key() continues and checks if a given key is
already present on some keyring by again calling
search_process_keyrings_rcu(). This search is done using
dns_resolver_cmp() and "abcdef" gets matched with now present key
"abcdef.".
* The found key is linked on the destination keyring by calling
__key_link() and using the previously calculated assoc_array_edit
operation. This inserts the "abcdef." key in the array but creates
a duplicity because the same index key is already present.
Fix the problem by postponing __key_link_begin() in
construct_alloc_key() until an actual key which should be linked into
the destination keyring is determined.
[jarkko@kernel.org: added a fixes tag and cc to stable]
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.3+
Fixes: df593ee23e05 ("keys: Hoist locking out of __key_link_begin()")
Signed-off-by: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Joey Lee <jlee@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
diff --git a/security/keys/request_key.c b/security/keys/request_key.c
index 07a0ef2baacd..a7673ad86d18 100644
--- a/security/keys/request_key.c
+++ b/security/keys/request_key.c
@@ -401,17 +401,21 @@ static int construct_alloc_key(struct keyring_search_context *ctx,
set_bit(KEY_FLAG_USER_CONSTRUCT, &key->flags);
if (dest_keyring) {
- ret = __key_link_lock(dest_keyring, &ctx->index_key);
+ ret = __key_link_lock(dest_keyring, &key->index_key);
if (ret < 0)
goto link_lock_failed;
- ret = __key_link_begin(dest_keyring, &ctx->index_key, &edit);
- if (ret < 0)
- goto link_prealloc_failed;
}
- /* attach the key to the destination keyring under lock, but we do need
+ /*
+ * Attach the key to the destination keyring under lock, but we do need
* to do another check just in case someone beat us to it whilst we
- * waited for locks */
+ * waited for locks.
+ *
+ * The caller might specify a comparison function which looks for keys
+ * that do not exactly match but are still equivalent from the caller's
+ * perspective. The __key_link_begin() operation must be done only after
+ * an actual key is determined.
+ */
mutex_lock(&key_construction_mutex);
rcu_read_lock();
@@ -420,12 +424,16 @@ static int construct_alloc_key(struct keyring_search_context *ctx,
if (!IS_ERR(key_ref))
goto key_already_present;
- if (dest_keyring)
+ if (dest_keyring) {
+ ret = __key_link_begin(dest_keyring, &key->index_key, &edit);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ goto link_alloc_failed;
__key_link(dest_keyring, key, &edit);
+ }
mutex_unlock(&key_construction_mutex);
if (dest_keyring)
- __key_link_end(dest_keyring, &ctx->index_key, edit);
+ __key_link_end(dest_keyring, &key->index_key, edit);
mutex_unlock(&user->cons_lock);
*_key = key;
kleave(" = 0 [%d]", key_serial(key));
@@ -438,10 +446,13 @@ static int construct_alloc_key(struct keyring_search_context *ctx,
mutex_unlock(&key_construction_mutex);
key = key_ref_to_ptr(key_ref);
if (dest_keyring) {
+ ret = __key_link_begin(dest_keyring, &key->index_key, &edit);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ goto link_alloc_failed_unlocked;
ret = __key_link_check_live_key(dest_keyring, key);
if (ret == 0)
__key_link(dest_keyring, key, &edit);
- __key_link_end(dest_keyring, &ctx->index_key, edit);
+ __key_link_end(dest_keyring, &key->index_key, edit);
if (ret < 0)
goto link_check_failed;
}
@@ -456,8 +467,10 @@ static int construct_alloc_key(struct keyring_search_context *ctx,
kleave(" = %d [linkcheck]", ret);
return ret;
-link_prealloc_failed:
- __key_link_end(dest_keyring, &ctx->index_key, edit);
+link_alloc_failed:
+ mutex_unlock(&key_construction_mutex);
+link_alloc_failed_unlocked:
+ __key_link_end(dest_keyring, &key->index_key, edit);
link_lock_failed:
mutex_unlock(&user->cons_lock);
key_put(key);
next reply other threads:[~2023-07-23 13:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-23 13:53 gregkh [this message]
2023-07-28 15:40 ` FAILED: patch "[PATCH] keys: Fix linking a duplicate key to a keyring's assoc_array" failed to apply to 5.4-stable tree Jarkko Sakkinen
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=2023072356-confirm-embezzle-c962@gregkh \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jarkko@kernel.org \
--cc=jlee@suse.com \
--cc=petr.pavlu@suse.com \
--cc=stable@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