On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 10:53:50PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> 2.6.32-longterm review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me
> know.
>
> ------------------
>
> From: Andrey Ryabinin <[email protected]>
>
> [ Upstream commit 40eea803c6b2cfaab092f053248cbeab3f368412 ]
>
> Sasha's report:
> > While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running the
> latest -next
> > kernel with the KASAN patchset, I've stumbled on the following spew:
> >
> > [ 4448.949424]
> ==================================================================
> > [ 4448.951737] AddressSanitizer: user-memory-access on address 0
> > [ 4448.952988] Read of size 2 by thread T19638:
> > [ 4448.954510] CPU: 28 PID: 19638 Comm: trinity-c76 Not tainted
> 3.16.0-rc4-next-20140711-sasha-00046-g07d3099-dirty #813
> > [ 4448.956823] ffff88046d86ca40 0000000000000000 ffff880082f37e78
> ffff880082f37a40
> > [ 4448.958233] ffffffffb6e47068 ffff880082f37a68 ffff880082f37a58
> ffffffffb242708d
> > [ 4448.959552] 0000000000000000 ffff880082f37a88 ffffffffb24255b1
> 0000000000000000
> > [ 4448.961266] Call Trace:
> > [ 4448.963158] dump_stack (lib/dump_stack.c:52)
> > [ 4448.964244] kasan_report_user_access (mm/kasan/report.c:184)
> > [ 4448.965507] __asan_load2 (mm/kasan/kasan.c:352)
> > [ 4448.966482] ? netlink_sendmsg (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2339)
> > [ 4448.967541] netlink_sendmsg (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2339)
> > [ 4448.968537] ? get_parent_ip (kernel/sched/core.c:2555)
> > [ 4448.970103] sock_sendmsg (net/socket.c:654)
> > [ 4448.971584] ? might_fault (mm/memory.c:3741)
> > [ 4448.972526] ? might_fault (./arch/x86/include/asm/current.h:14
> mm/memory.c:3740)
> > [ 4448.973596] ? verify_iovec (net/core/iovec.c:64)
> > [ 4448.974522] ___sys_sendmsg (net/socket.c:2096)
> > [ 4448.975797] ? put_lock_stats.isra.13
> (./arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h:98 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:254)
> > [ 4448.977030] ? lock_release_holdtime (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:273)
> > [ 4448.978197] ? lock_release_non_nested
> (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3434 (discriminator 1))
> > [ 4448.979346] ? check_chain_key (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2188)
> > [ 4448.980535] __sys_sendmmsg (net/socket.c:2181)
> > [ 4448.981592] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller
> (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2600)
> > [ 4448.982773] ? trace_hardirqs_on (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2607)
> > [ 4448.984458] ? syscall_trace_enter (arch/x86/kernel/ptrace.c:1500
> (discriminator 2))
> > [ 4448.985621] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller
> (kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2600)
> > [ 4448.986754] SyS_sendmmsg (net/socket.c:2201)
> > [ 4448.987708] tracesys (arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S:542)
> > [ 4448.988929]
> ==================================================================
>
> This reports means that we've come to netlink_sendmsg() with msg->msg_name ==
> NULL and msg->msg_namelen > 0.
>
> After this report there was no usual "Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer
> dereference"
> and this gave me a clue that address 0 is mapped and contains valid socket
> address structure in it.
>
> This bug was introduced in f3d3342602f8bcbf37d7c46641cb9bca7618eb1c
> (net: rework recvmsg handler msg_name and msg_namelen logic).
> Commit message states that:
> "Set msg->msg_name = NULL if user specified a NULL in msg_name but had a
> non-null msg_namelen in verify_iovec/verify_compat_iovec. This doesn't
> affect sendto as it would bail out earlier while trying to copy-in the
> address."
> But in fact this affects sendto when address 0 is mapped and contains
> socket address structure in it. In such case copy-in address will succeed,
> verify_iovec() function will successfully exit with msg->msg_namelen > 0
> and msg->msg_name == NULL.
>
> This patch fixes it by setting msg_namelen to 0 if msg_name == NULL.
>
> Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <[email protected]>
> Cc: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
> Cc: <[email protected]>
> Reported-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Ryabinin <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <[email protected]>
> ---
> net/compat.c | 9 +++++----
> net/core/iovec.c | 6 +++---
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/compat.c b/net/compat.c
> index e9672c8..71ed839 100644
> --- a/net/compat.c
> +++ b/net/compat.c
> @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ int verify_compat_iovec(struct msghdr *kern_msg, struct
> iovec *kern_iov,
> {
> int tot_len;
>
> - if (kern_msg->msg_namelen) {
> + if (kern_msg->msg_namelen && kern_msg->msg_namelen) {
I know my review is already too late for the release, but the above
line isn't correct -- it's checking msg_namelen twice, instead of
checking msg_name as well:
if (kern_msg->msg_name && kern_msg->msg_namelen)
Cheers,
--
Luís
> if (mode==VERIFY_READ) {
> int err = move_addr_to_kernel(kern_msg->msg_name,
> kern_msg->msg_namelen,
> @@ -91,10 +91,11 @@ int verify_compat_iovec(struct msghdr *kern_msg, struct
> iovec *kern_iov,
> if (err < 0)
> return err;
> }
> - if (kern_msg->msg_name)
> - kern_msg->msg_name = kern_address;
> - } else
> + kern_msg->msg_name = kern_address;
> + } else {
> kern_msg->msg_name = NULL;
> + kern_msg->msg_namelen = 0;
> + }
>
> tot_len = iov_from_user_compat_to_kern(kern_iov,
> (struct compat_iovec __user
> *)kern_msg->msg_iov,
> diff --git a/net/core/iovec.c b/net/core/iovec.c
> index 39369e9..3face24 100644
> --- a/net/core/iovec.c
> +++ b/net/core/iovec.c
> @@ -40,17 +40,17 @@ int verify_iovec(struct msghdr *m, struct iovec *iov,
> struct sockaddr *address,
> {
> int size, ct, err;
>
> - if (m->msg_namelen) {
> + if (m->msg_name && m->msg_namelen) {
> if (mode == VERIFY_READ) {
> err = move_addr_to_kernel(m->msg_name, m->msg_namelen,
> address);
> if (err < 0)
> return err;
> }
> - if (m->msg_name)
> - m->msg_name = address;
> + m->msg_name = address;
> } else {
> m->msg_name = NULL;
> + m->msg_namelen = 0;
> }
>
> size = m->msg_iovlen * sizeof(struct iovec);
> --
> 1.7.12.2.21.g234cd45.dirty
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
