From: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc: "kaplan, david" <david.kaplan@amd.com>, mst <mst@redhat.com>,
"Hetzelt, Felicitas" <f.hetzelt@tu-berlin.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 1/4] virtio_ring: validate used buffer length
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 08:55:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211122075524.lzojug4hspzglzhl@steredhat> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACGkMEu+9FvMsghyi55Ee5BxetP-YK9wh2oaT8OgLiY5+tV0QQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 02:25:26PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 1:49 PM Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 06:35:18 +0100
>> Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > I think it should be a common issue, looking at
>> > > vhost_vsock_handle_tx_kick(), it did:
>> > >
>> > > len += sizeof(pkt->hdr);
>> > > vhost_add_used(vq, head, len);
>> > >
>> > > which looks like a violation of the spec since it's TX.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure the lines above look like a violation of the spec. If you
>> > examine vhost_vsock_alloc_pkt() I believe that you will agree that:
>> > len == pkt->len == pkt->hdr.len
>> > which makes sense since according to the spec both tx and rx messages
>> > are hdr+payload. And I believe hdr.len is the size of the payload,
>> > although that does not seem to be properly documented by the spec.
>
>Sorry for being unclear, what I meant is that we probably should use
>zero here. TX doesn't use in buffer actually.
>
>According to the spec, 0 should be the used length:
>
>"and len the total of bytes written into the buffer."
>
>> >
>> > On the other hand tx messages are stated to be device read-only (in the
>> > spec) so if the device writes stuff, that is certainly wrong.
>> >
>
>Yes.
>
>> > If that is what happens.
>> >
>> > Looking at virtqueue_get_buf_ctx_split() I'm not sure that is what
>> > happens. My hypothesis is that we just a last descriptor is an 'in'
>> > type descriptor (i.e. a device writable one). For tx that assumption
>> > would be wrong.
>> >
>> > I will have another look at this today and send a fix patch if my
>> > suspicion is confirmed.
>>
>> If my suspicion is right something like:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>> index 00f64f2f8b72..efb57898920b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>> @@ -764,6 +764,7 @@ static void *virtqueue_get_buf_ctx_split(struct virtqueue *_vq,
>> struct vring_virtqueue *vq = to_vvq(_vq);
>> void *ret;
>> unsigned int i;
>> + bool has_in;
>> u16 last_used;
>>
>> START_USE(vq);
>> @@ -787,6 +788,9 @@ static void *virtqueue_get_buf_ctx_split(struct virtqueue *_vq,
>> vq->split.vring.used->ring[last_used].id);
>> *len = virtio32_to_cpu(_vq->vdev,
>> vq->split.vring.used->ring[last_used].len);
>> + has_in = virtio16_to_cpu(_vq->vdev,
>> + vq->split.vring.used->ring[last_used].flags)
>> + & VRING_DESC_F_WRITE;
>
>Did you mean vring.desc actually? If yes, it's better not depend on
>the descriptor ring which can be modified by the device. We've stored
>the flags in desc_extra[].
>
>>
>> if (unlikely(i >= vq->split.vring.num)) {
>> BAD_RING(vq, "id %u out of range\n", i);
>> @@ -796,7 +800,7 @@ static void *virtqueue_get_buf_ctx_split(struct virtqueue *_vq,
>> BAD_RING(vq, "id %u is not a head!\n", i);
>> return NULL;
>> }
>> - if (vq->buflen && unlikely(*len > vq->buflen[i])) {
>> + if (has_in && q->buflen && unlikely(*len > vq->buflen[i])) {
>> BAD_RING(vq, "used len %d is larger than in buflen %u\n",
>> *len, vq->buflen[i]);
>> return NULL;
>>
>> would fix the problem for split. I will try that out and let you know
>> later.
>
>I'm not sure I get this, in virtqueue_add_split, the buflen[i] only
>contains the in buffer length.
>
>I think the fixes are:
>
>1) fixing the vhost vsock
Yep, in vhost_vsock_handle_tx_kick() we should have vhost_add_used(vq,
head, 0) since the device doesn't write anything.
>2) use suppress_used_validation=true to let vsock driver to validate
>the in buffer length
>3) probably a new feature so the driver can only enable the validation
>when the feature is enabled.
I fully agree with these steps.
Thanks,
Stefano
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-22 7:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-27 2:21 [PATCH V5 0/4] Validate used buffer length Jason Wang
2021-10-27 2:21 ` [PATCH V5 1/4] virtio_ring: validate " Jason Wang
2021-11-02 3:18 ` Xuan Zhuo
2021-11-02 3:54 ` Jason Wang
2021-11-19 15:09 ` Halil Pasic
2021-11-22 3:51 ` Jason Wang
2021-11-22 5:35 ` Halil Pasic
2021-11-22 5:49 ` Halil Pasic
2021-11-22 6:25 ` Jason Wang
2021-11-22 7:55 ` Stefano Garzarella [this message]
2021-11-22 11:08 ` Stefano Garzarella
2021-11-22 14:24 ` Halil Pasic
2021-11-22 16:23 ` Stefano Garzarella
2021-11-22 13:50 ` Halil Pasic
2021-11-23 2:30 ` Jason Wang
2021-11-23 12:17 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-11-23 12:43 ` Halil Pasic
2021-11-22 20:23 ` Halil Pasic
2021-11-23 2:25 ` Jason Wang
2021-11-23 11:05 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-11-24 1:30 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-11-24 2:26 ` Jason Wang
2021-11-24 2:33 ` Jason Wang
2021-11-24 7:22 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-11-24 7:59 ` Jason Wang
2021-11-24 8:24 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-11-24 8:28 ` Jason Wang
2021-11-24 11:33 ` Halil Pasic
2021-11-25 2:27 ` Jason Wang
2021-11-22 7:42 ` Stefano Garzarella
2021-10-27 2:21 ` [PATCH V5 2/4] virtio-net: don't let virtio core to validate used length Jason Wang
2021-10-27 2:21 ` [PATCH V5 3/4] virtio-blk: " Jason Wang
2021-10-27 2:21 ` [PATCH V5 4/4] virtio-scsi: don't let virtio core to validate used buffer length Jason Wang
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=20211122075524.lzojug4hspzglzhl@steredhat \
--to=sgarzare@redhat.com \
--cc=david.kaplan@amd.com \
--cc=f.hetzelt@tu-berlin.de \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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