From: Chun-Yi Lee <[email protected]>
For fixing CVE-2023-6270, f98364e92662 patch moved dev_put() from
aoecmd_cfg_pkts() to tx() to avoid that the tx() runs into use-after-free.
But Nicolai Stange found more places in aoe have potential use-after-free
problem with tx(). e.g. revalidate(), aoecmd_ata_rw(), resend(), probe()
and aoecmd_cfg_rsp(). Those functions also use aoenet_xmit() to push
packet to tx queue. So they should also use dev_hold() to increase the
refcnt of skb->dev.
This patch adds dev_hold() to those functions and also uses dev_put()
when the skb_clone() returns NULL.
Link: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-6270
Fixes: f98364e92662 ("aoe: fix the potential use-after-free problem in
aoecmd_cfg_pkts")
Reported-by: Nicolai Stange <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Chun-Yi Lee <[email protected]>
---
drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c b/drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c
index cc9077b588d7..fcedbad8e3be 100644
--- a/drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c
+++ b/drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c
@@ -361,6 +361,7 @@ ata_rw_frameinit(struct frame *f)
}
ah->cmdstat = ATA_CMD_PIO_READ | writebit | extbit;
+ dev_hold(t->ifp->nd);
skb->dev = t->ifp->nd;
}
@@ -401,7 +402,8 @@ aoecmd_ata_rw(struct aoedev *d)
__skb_queue_head_init(&queue);
__skb_queue_tail(&queue, skb);
aoenet_xmit(&queue);
- }
+ } else
+ dev_put(f->t->ifp->nd);
return 1;
}
@@ -483,10 +485,13 @@ resend(struct aoedev *d, struct frame *f)
memcpy(h->dst, t->addr, sizeof h->dst);
memcpy(h->src, t->ifp->nd->dev_addr, sizeof h->src);
+ dev_hold(t->ifp->nd);
skb->dev = t->ifp->nd;
skb = skb_clone(skb, GFP_ATOMIC);
- if (skb == NULL)
+ if (skb == NULL) {
+ dev_put(t->ifp->nd);
return;
+ }
f->sent = ktime_get();
__skb_queue_head_init(&queue);
__skb_queue_tail(&queue, skb);
@@ -617,7 +622,8 @@ probe(struct aoetgt *t)
__skb_queue_head_init(&queue);
__skb_queue_tail(&queue, skb);
aoenet_xmit(&queue);
- }
+ } else
+ dev_put(f->t->ifp->nd);
}
static long
@@ -1395,6 +1401,7 @@ aoecmd_ata_id(struct aoedev *d)
ah->cmdstat = ATA_CMD_ID_ATA;
ah->lba3 = 0xa0;
+ dev_hold(t->ifp->nd);
skb->dev = t->ifp->nd;
d->rttavg = RTTAVG_INIT;
@@ -1404,6 +1411,8 @@ aoecmd_ata_id(struct aoedev *d)
skb = skb_clone(skb, GFP_ATOMIC);
if (skb)
f->sent = ktime_get();
+ else
+ dev_put(t->ifp->nd);
return skb;
}
--
2.35.3
Hi Justin,
On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 09:48:58PM +0800, Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
> From: Chun-Yi Lee <[email protected]>
>
> For fixing CVE-2023-6270, f98364e92662 patch moved dev_put() from
> aoecmd_cfg_pkts() to tx() to avoid that the tx() runs into use-after-free.
>
> But Nicolai Stange found more places in aoe have potential use-after-free
> problem with tx(). e.g. revalidate(), aoecmd_ata_rw(), resend(), probe()
> and aoecmd_cfg_rsp(). Those functions also use aoenet_xmit() to push
> packet to tx queue. So they should also use dev_hold() to increase the
> refcnt of skb->dev.
>
> This patch adds dev_hold() to those functions and also uses dev_put()
> when the skb_clone() returns NULL.
>
> Link: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-6270
> Fixes: f98364e92662 ("aoe: fix the potential use-after-free problem in
> aoecmd_cfg_pkts")
> Reported-by: Nicolai Stange <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Chun-Yi Lee <[email protected]>
Do you have any suggestion for this patch? or I missed anything?
Thanks a lot!
Joey Lee
> ---
> drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c b/drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c
> index cc9077b588d7..fcedbad8e3be 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c
> @@ -361,6 +361,7 @@ ata_rw_frameinit(struct frame *f)
> }
>
> ah->cmdstat = ATA_CMD_PIO_READ | writebit | extbit;
> + dev_hold(t->ifp->nd);
> skb->dev = t->ifp->nd;
> }
>
> @@ -401,7 +402,8 @@ aoecmd_ata_rw(struct aoedev *d)
> __skb_queue_head_init(&queue);
> __skb_queue_tail(&queue, skb);
> aoenet_xmit(&queue);
> - }
> + } else
> + dev_put(f->t->ifp->nd);
> return 1;
> }
>
> @@ -483,10 +485,13 @@ resend(struct aoedev *d, struct frame *f)
> memcpy(h->dst, t->addr, sizeof h->dst);
> memcpy(h->src, t->ifp->nd->dev_addr, sizeof h->src);
>
> + dev_hold(t->ifp->nd);
> skb->dev = t->ifp->nd;
> skb = skb_clone(skb, GFP_ATOMIC);
> - if (skb == NULL)
> + if (skb == NULL) {
> + dev_put(t->ifp->nd);
> return;
> + }
> f->sent = ktime_get();
> __skb_queue_head_init(&queue);
> __skb_queue_tail(&queue, skb);
> @@ -617,7 +622,8 @@ probe(struct aoetgt *t)
> __skb_queue_head_init(&queue);
> __skb_queue_tail(&queue, skb);
> aoenet_xmit(&queue);
> - }
> + } else
> + dev_put(f->t->ifp->nd);
> }
>
> static long
> @@ -1395,6 +1401,7 @@ aoecmd_ata_id(struct aoedev *d)
> ah->cmdstat = ATA_CMD_ID_ATA;
> ah->lba3 = 0xa0;
>
> + dev_hold(t->ifp->nd);
> skb->dev = t->ifp->nd;
>
> d->rttavg = RTTAVG_INIT;
> @@ -1404,6 +1411,8 @@ aoecmd_ata_id(struct aoedev *d)
> skb = skb_clone(skb, GFP_ATOMIC);
> if (skb)
> f->sent = ktime_get();
> + else
> + dev_put(t->ifp->nd);
>
> return skb;
> }
> --
> 2.35.3
> For fixing CVE-2023-6270, f98364e92662 patch moved dev_put() from
…
Please add a subject for the mentioned commit hash.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.9-rc6#n99
> This patch adds dev_hold() to those functions and also uses dev_put()
> when the skb_clone() returns NULL.
Please improve this change description with a corresponding imperative wording.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.9-rc6#n94
…
> Fixes: f98364e92662 ("aoe: fix the potential use-after-free problem in
> aoecmd_cfg_pkts")
I suggest to omit a line break for this tag.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.9-rc6#n145
…
> +++ b/drivers/block/aoe/aoecmd.c
…
> @@ -401,7 +402,8 @@ aoecmd_ata_rw(struct aoedev *d)
> __skb_queue_head_init(&queue);
> __skb_queue_tail(&queue, skb);
> aoenet_xmit(&queue);
> - }
> + } else
> + dev_put(f->t->ifp->nd);
> return 1;
> }
>
…
> @@ -617,7 +622,8 @@ probe(struct aoetgt *t)
> __skb_queue_head_init(&queue);
> __skb_queue_tail(&queue, skb);
> aoenet_xmit(&queue);
> - }
> + } else
> + dev_put(f->t->ifp->nd);
> }
>
> static long
…
Should curly brackets be used for both if branches in these function implementations?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?h=v6.9-rc6#n213
Regards,
Markus