From: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
We can get EBADF from __pidfd_fget() if a task is currently exiting, which
might be confusing. Let's check PF_EXITING, and just report ESRCH if so.
I chose PF_EXITING, because it is set in exit_signals(), which is called
before exit_files(). Since ->exit_status is mostly set after exit_files()
in exit_notify(), using that still leaves a window open for the race.
Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
v2: fix a race in the check by putting the check after __pidfd_fget()
(thanks Oleg)
---
kernel/pid.c | 17 +++++++++-
.../selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++-
2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/pid.c b/kernel/pid.c
index de0bf2f8d18b..a8cd6296ed6d 100644
--- a/kernel/pid.c
+++ b/kernel/pid.c
@@ -693,8 +693,23 @@ static int pidfd_getfd(struct pid *pid, int fd)
file = __pidfd_fget(task, fd);
put_task_struct(task);
- if (IS_ERR(file))
+ if (IS_ERR(file)) {
+ /*
+ * It is possible that the target thread is exiting; it can be
+ * either:
+ * 1. before exit_signals(), which gives a real fd
+ * 2. before exit_files() takes the task_lock() gives a real fd
+ * 3. after exit_files() releases task_lock(), ->files is NULL;
+ * this has PF_EXITING, since it was set in exit_signals(),
+ * __pidfd_fget() returns EBADF.
+ * In case 3 we get EBADF, but that really means ESRCH, since
+ * the task is currently exiting and has freed its files
+ * struct, so we fix it up.
+ */
+ if (task->flags & PF_EXITING && PTR_ERR(file) == -EBADF)
+ return -ESRCH;
return PTR_ERR(file);
+ }
ret = receive_fd(file, NULL, O_CLOEXEC);
fput(file);
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c
index 0930e2411dfb..cd51d547b751 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <limits.h>
#include <linux/types.h>
+#include <poll.h>
#include <sched.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdio.h>
@@ -129,6 +130,7 @@ FIXTURE(child)
* When it is closed, the child will exit.
*/
int sk;
+ bool ignore_child_result;
};
FIXTURE_SETUP(child)
@@ -165,10 +167,14 @@ FIXTURE_SETUP(child)
FIXTURE_TEARDOWN(child)
{
+ int ret;
+
EXPECT_EQ(0, close(self->pidfd));
EXPECT_EQ(0, close(self->sk));
- EXPECT_EQ(0, wait_for_pid(self->pid));
+ ret = wait_for_pid(self->pid);
+ if (!self->ignore_child_result)
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, ret);
}
TEST_F(child, disable_ptrace)
@@ -235,6 +241,29 @@ TEST(flags_set)
EXPECT_EQ(errno, EINVAL);
}
+TEST_F(child, no_strange_EBADF)
+{
+ struct pollfd fds;
+
+ self->ignore_child_result = true;
+
+ fds.fd = self->pidfd;
+ fds.events = POLLIN;
+
+ ASSERT_EQ(kill(self->pid, SIGKILL), 0);
+ ASSERT_EQ(poll(&fds, 1, 5000), 1);
+
+ /*
+ * It used to be that pidfd_getfd() could race with the exiting thread
+ * between exit_files() and release_task(), and get a non-null task
+ * with a NULL files struct, and you'd get EBADF, which was slightly
+ * confusing.
+ */
+ errno = 0;
+ EXPECT_EQ(sys_pidfd_getfd(self->pidfd, self->remote_fd, 0), -1);
+ EXPECT_EQ(errno, ESRCH);
+}
+
#if __NR_pidfd_getfd == -1
int main(void)
{
base-commit: 082d11c164aef02e51bcd9c7cbf1554a8e42d9b5
--
2.34.1
On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 12:23:57PM -0700, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> From: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
>
> We can get EBADF from __pidfd_fget() if a task is currently exiting, which
> might be confusing. Let's check PF_EXITING, and just report ESRCH if so.
>
> I chose PF_EXITING, because it is set in exit_signals(), which is called
> before exit_files(). Since ->exit_status is mostly set after exit_files()
> in exit_notify(), using that still leaves a window open for the race.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
> v2: fix a race in the check by putting the check after __pidfd_fget()
> (thanks Oleg)
> ---
> kernel/pid.c | 17 +++++++++-
> .../selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++-
> 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/pid.c b/kernel/pid.c
> index de0bf2f8d18b..a8cd6296ed6d 100644
> --- a/kernel/pid.c
> +++ b/kernel/pid.c
> @@ -693,8 +693,23 @@ static int pidfd_getfd(struct pid *pid, int fd)
>
> file = __pidfd_fget(task, fd);
> put_task_struct(task);
> - if (IS_ERR(file))
> + if (IS_ERR(file)) {
> + /*
> + * It is possible that the target thread is exiting; it can be
> + * either:
> + * 1. before exit_signals(), which gives a real fd
> + * 2. before exit_files() takes the task_lock() gives a real fd
> + * 3. after exit_files() releases task_lock(), ->files is NULL;
> + * this has PF_EXITING, since it was set in exit_signals(),
> + * __pidfd_fget() returns EBADF.
> + * In case 3 we get EBADF, but that really means ESRCH, since
> + * the task is currently exiting and has freed its files
> + * struct, so we fix it up.
> + */
> + if (task->flags & PF_EXITING && PTR_ERR(file) == -EBADF)
> + return -ESRCH;
Isn't that a potential UAF because we called put_task_struct() above but
this is exiting task->flags afterwards?
On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 10:15:25AM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 12:23:57PM -0700, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> > From: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
> >
> > We can get EBADF from __pidfd_fget() if a task is currently exiting, which
> > might be confusing. Let's check PF_EXITING, and just report ESRCH if so.
> >
> > I chose PF_EXITING, because it is set in exit_signals(), which is called
> > before exit_files(). Since ->exit_status is mostly set after exit_files()
> > in exit_notify(), using that still leaves a window open for the race.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
> > v2: fix a race in the check by putting the check after __pidfd_fget()
> > (thanks Oleg)
> > ---
> > kernel/pid.c | 17 +++++++++-
> > .../selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++-
> > 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/pid.c b/kernel/pid.c
> > index de0bf2f8d18b..a8cd6296ed6d 100644
> > --- a/kernel/pid.c
> > +++ b/kernel/pid.c
> > @@ -693,8 +693,23 @@ static int pidfd_getfd(struct pid *pid, int fd)
> >
> > file = __pidfd_fget(task, fd);
> > put_task_struct(task);
> > - if (IS_ERR(file))
> > + if (IS_ERR(file)) {
> > + /*
> > + * It is possible that the target thread is exiting; it can be
> > + * either:
> > + * 1. before exit_signals(), which gives a real fd
> > + * 2. before exit_files() takes the task_lock() gives a real fd
> > + * 3. after exit_files() releases task_lock(), ->files is NULL;
> > + * this has PF_EXITING, since it was set in exit_signals(),
> > + * __pidfd_fget() returns EBADF.
> > + * In case 3 we get EBADF, but that really means ESRCH, since
> > + * the task is currently exiting and has freed its files
> > + * struct, so we fix it up.
> > + */
> > + if (task->flags & PF_EXITING && PTR_ERR(file) == -EBADF)
> > + return -ESRCH;
>
> Isn't that a potential UAF because we called put_task_struct() above but
> this is exiting task->flags afterwards?
s/exiting/accessing/
On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 10:29:51AM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 10:15:25AM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 12:23:57PM -0700, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> > > From: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > We can get EBADF from __pidfd_fget() if a task is currently exiting, which
> > > might be confusing. Let's check PF_EXITING, and just report ESRCH if so.
> > >
> > > I chose PF_EXITING, because it is set in exit_signals(), which is called
> > > before exit_files(). Since ->exit_status is mostly set after exit_files()
> > > in exit_notify(), using that still leaves a window open for the race.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
> > > v2: fix a race in the check by putting the check after __pidfd_fget()
> > > (thanks Oleg)
> > > ---
> > > kernel/pid.c | 17 +++++++++-
> > > .../selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++-
> > > 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/kernel/pid.c b/kernel/pid.c
> > > index de0bf2f8d18b..a8cd6296ed6d 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/pid.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/pid.c
> > > @@ -693,8 +693,23 @@ static int pidfd_getfd(struct pid *pid, int fd)
> > >
> > > file = __pidfd_fget(task, fd);
> > > put_task_struct(task);
> > > - if (IS_ERR(file))
> > > + if (IS_ERR(file)) {
> > > + /*
> > > + * It is possible that the target thread is exiting; it can be
> > > + * either:
> > > + * 1. before exit_signals(), which gives a real fd
> > > + * 2. before exit_files() takes the task_lock() gives a real fd
> > > + * 3. after exit_files() releases task_lock(), ->files is NULL;
> > > + * this has PF_EXITING, since it was set in exit_signals(),
> > > + * __pidfd_fget() returns EBADF.
> > > + * In case 3 we get EBADF, but that really means ESRCH, since
> > > + * the task is currently exiting and has freed its files
> > > + * struct, so we fix it up.
> > > + */
> > > + if (task->flags & PF_EXITING && PTR_ERR(file) == -EBADF)
> > > + return -ESRCH;
> >
> > Isn't that a potential UAF because we called put_task_struct() above but
> > this is exiting task->flags afterwards?
>
> s/exiting/accessing/
So this is what I have applied currently where I moved the check into
__pidfd_fget() where it makes more sense imho. But please double check
that I didn't mess anything up:
From 7ab8f833aceb11c78627f4ea5d7e354314efa385 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 10:19:29 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] pidfd: getfd should always report ESRCH if a task is
exiting
We can get EBADF from pidfd_getfd() if a task is currently exiting,
which might be confusing. Let's check PF_EXITING, and just report ESRCH
if so.
I chose PF_EXITING, because it is set in exit_signals(), which is called
before exit_files(). Since ->exit_status is mostly set after
exit_files() in exit_notify(), using that still leaves a window open for
the race.
Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <[email protected]>
---
kernel/pid.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/pid.c b/kernel/pid.c
index de0bf2f8d18b..c1d940fbd314 100644
--- a/kernel/pid.c
+++ b/kernel/pid.c
@@ -678,7 +678,26 @@ static struct file *__pidfd_fget(struct task_struct *task, int fd)
up_read(&task->signal->exec_update_lock);
- return file ?: ERR_PTR(-EBADF);
+ if (!file) {
+ /*
+ * It is possible that the target thread is exiting; it can be
+ * either:
+ * 1. before exit_signals(), which gives a real fd
+ * 2. before exit_files() takes the task_lock() gives a real fd
+ * 3. after exit_files() releases task_lock(), ->files is NULL;
+ * this has PF_EXITING, since it was set in exit_signals(),
+ * __pidfd_fget() returns EBADF.
+ * In case 3 we get EBADF, but that really means ESRCH, since
+ * the task is currently exiting and has freed its files
+ * struct, so we fix it up.
+ */
+ if (task->flags & PF_EXITING)
+ file = ERR_PTR(-ESRCH);
+ else
+ file = ERR_PTR(-EBADF);
+ }
+
+ return file;
}
static int pidfd_getfd(struct pid *pid, int fd)
--
2.43.0
From 43316ed070cd8fb02a51ea9577c5fc1fcf639652 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 10:19:44 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: add ESRCH tests for pidfd_getfd()
Ensure that pidfd_getfd() reports -ESRCH if the task is already exiting.
Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <[email protected]>
---
.../selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c
index 0930e2411dfb..cd51d547b751 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_getfd_test.c
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <limits.h>
#include <linux/types.h>
+#include <poll.h>
#include <sched.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdio.h>
@@ -129,6 +130,7 @@ FIXTURE(child)
* When it is closed, the child will exit.
*/
int sk;
+ bool ignore_child_result;
};
FIXTURE_SETUP(child)
@@ -165,10 +167,14 @@ FIXTURE_SETUP(child)
FIXTURE_TEARDOWN(child)
{
+ int ret;
+
EXPECT_EQ(0, close(self->pidfd));
EXPECT_EQ(0, close(self->sk));
- EXPECT_EQ(0, wait_for_pid(self->pid));
+ ret = wait_for_pid(self->pid);
+ if (!self->ignore_child_result)
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, ret);
}
TEST_F(child, disable_ptrace)
@@ -235,6 +241,29 @@ TEST(flags_set)
EXPECT_EQ(errno, EINVAL);
}
+TEST_F(child, no_strange_EBADF)
+{
+ struct pollfd fds;
+
+ self->ignore_child_result = true;
+
+ fds.fd = self->pidfd;
+ fds.events = POLLIN;
+
+ ASSERT_EQ(kill(self->pid, SIGKILL), 0);
+ ASSERT_EQ(poll(&fds, 1, 5000), 1);
+
+ /*
+ * It used to be that pidfd_getfd() could race with the exiting thread
+ * between exit_files() and release_task(), and get a non-null task
+ * with a NULL files struct, and you'd get EBADF, which was slightly
+ * confusing.
+ */
+ errno = 0;
+ EXPECT_EQ(sys_pidfd_getfd(self->pidfd, self->remote_fd, 0), -1);
+ EXPECT_EQ(errno, ESRCH);
+}
+
#if __NR_pidfd_getfd == -1
int main(void)
{
--
2.43.0
On 02/07, Christian Brauner wrote:
>
> So this is what I have applied currently where I moved the check into
> __pidfd_fget() where it makes more sense imho. But please double check
> that I didn't mess anything up:
LGTM.
You have already applied this patch, no need to add my ack, but FWIW
Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 11:32:01AM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/07, Christian Brauner wrote:
> >
> > So this is what I have applied currently where I moved the check into
> > __pidfd_fget() where it makes more sense imho. But please double check
> > that I didn't mess anything up:
>
> LGTM.
>
> You have already applied this patch, no need to add my ack, but FWIW
>
> Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Added. Thank you!
On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 10:50:26AM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote:
> So this is what I have applied currently where I moved the check into
> __pidfd_fget() where it makes more sense imho. But please double check
> that I didn't mess anything up:
Oof, good catch. Looks good to me.
Thanks,
Tycho