Hello,
syzbot found the following crash on:
HEAD commit: d724f94f x86, kcsan: Enable KCSAN for x86
git tree: https://github.com/google/ktsan.git kcsan
console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=17884db3600000
kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=c0906aa620713d80
dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=e392f8008a294fdf8891
compiler: gcc (GCC) 9.0.0 20181231 (experimental)
Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this crash yet.
IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
Reported-by: [email protected]
==================================================================
BUG: KCSAN: data-race in task_dump_owner / task_dump_owner
write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7804 on cpu 0:
task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
link_path_walk.part.0+0x5d3/0xa90 fs/namei.c:2139
link_path_walk fs/namei.c:2070 [inline]
path_openat+0x14f/0x3530 fs/namei.c:3532
do_filp_open+0x11e/0x1b0 fs/namei.c:3563
do_sys_open+0x3b3/0x4f0 fs/open.c:1089
__do_sys_open fs/open.c:1107 [inline]
__se_sys_open fs/open.c:1102 [inline]
__x64_sys_open+0x55/0x70 fs/open.c:1102
do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7813 on cpu 1:
task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
lookup_last fs/namei.c:2271 [inline]
path_lookupat.isra.0+0x13a/0x5a0 fs/namei.c:2316
filename_lookup+0x145/0x2d0 fs/namei.c:2346
user_path_at_empty+0x4c/0x70 fs/namei.c:2606
user_path_at include/linux/namei.h:60 [inline]
vfs_statx+0xd9/0x190 fs/stat.c:187
vfs_stat include/linux/fs.h:3188 [inline]
__do_sys_newstat+0x51/0xb0 fs/stat.c:341
__se_sys_newstat fs/stat.c:337 [inline]
__x64_sys_newstat+0x3a/0x50 fs/stat.c:337
do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
CPU: 1 PID: 7813 Comm: ps Not tainted 5.3.0+ #0
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
Google 01/01/2011
==================================================================
---
This bug is generated by a bot. It may contain errors.
See https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ for more information about syzbot.
syzbot engineers can be reached at [email protected].
syzbot will keep track of this bug report. See:
https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ#status for how to communicate with syzbot.
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 14:36, syzbot
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> syzbot found the following crash on:
>
> HEAD commit: d724f94f x86, kcsan: Enable KCSAN for x86
> git tree: https://github.com/google/ktsan.git kcsan
> console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=17884db3600000
> kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=c0906aa620713d80
> dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=e392f8008a294fdf8891
> compiler: gcc (GCC) 9.0.0 20181231 (experimental)
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this crash yet.
>
> IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
> Reported-by: [email protected]
>
> ==================================================================
> BUG: KCSAN: data-race in task_dump_owner / task_dump_owner
>
> write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7804 on cpu 0:
> task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
> pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
> pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
> d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
> d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
> lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
> walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
> link_path_walk.part.0+0x5d3/0xa90 fs/namei.c:2139
> link_path_walk fs/namei.c:2070 [inline]
> path_openat+0x14f/0x3530 fs/namei.c:3532
> do_filp_open+0x11e/0x1b0 fs/namei.c:3563
> do_sys_open+0x3b3/0x4f0 fs/open.c:1089
> __do_sys_open fs/open.c:1107 [inline]
> __se_sys_open fs/open.c:1102 [inline]
> __x64_sys_open+0x55/0x70 fs/open.c:1102
> do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>
> write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7813 on cpu 1:
> task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
> pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
> pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
> d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
> d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
> lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
> walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
> lookup_last fs/namei.c:2271 [inline]
> path_lookupat.isra.0+0x13a/0x5a0 fs/namei.c:2316
> filename_lookup+0x145/0x2d0 fs/namei.c:2346
> user_path_at_empty+0x4c/0x70 fs/namei.c:2606
> user_path_at include/linux/namei.h:60 [inline]
> vfs_statx+0xd9/0x190 fs/stat.c:187
> vfs_stat include/linux/fs.h:3188 [inline]
> __do_sys_newstat+0x51/0xb0 fs/stat.c:341
> __se_sys_newstat fs/stat.c:337 [inline]
> __x64_sys_newstat+0x3a/0x50 fs/stat.c:337
> do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
>
> Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
> CPU: 1 PID: 7813 Comm: ps Not tainted 5.3.0+ #0
> Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
> Google 01/01/2011
> ==================================================================
My understanding is, that for every access to /proc/<pid>,
d_revalidate is called, and /proc-fs implementation simply says that
pid_revalidate always revalidates by rewriting uid/gid because "owning
task may have performed a setuid(), etc." presumably so every access
to a /proc/<pid> entry always has the right uid/gid (in effect
updating /proc/<pid> lazily via d_revalidate).
Is it possible that one of the tasks above could be preempted after
doing its writes to *ruid/*rgid, another thread writing some other
values (after setuid / seteuid), and then the preempted thread seeing
the other values? Assertion here should never fail:
=== TASK 1 ===
| seteuid(1000);
| seteuid(0);
| stat("/proc/<pid-of-task-1>", &fstat);
| assert(fstat.st_uid == 0);
=== TASK 2 ===
| stat("/proc/<pid-of-task-1>", ...);
Best Wishes,
-- Marco
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 02:56:47PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 14:36, syzbot
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > syzbot found the following crash on:
> >
> > HEAD commit: d724f94f x86, kcsan: Enable KCSAN for x86
> > git tree: https://github.com/google/ktsan.git kcsan
> > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=17884db3600000
> > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=c0906aa620713d80
> > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=e392f8008a294fdf8891
> > compiler: gcc (GCC) 9.0.0 20181231 (experimental)
> >
> > Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this crash yet.
> >
> > IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > Reported-by: [email protected]
> >
> > ==================================================================
> > BUG: KCSAN: data-race in task_dump_owner / task_dump_owner
> >
> > write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7804 on cpu 0:
> > task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
> > pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
> > pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
> > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
> > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
> > lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
> > walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
> > link_path_walk.part.0+0x5d3/0xa90 fs/namei.c:2139
> > link_path_walk fs/namei.c:2070 [inline]
> > path_openat+0x14f/0x3530 fs/namei.c:3532
> > do_filp_open+0x11e/0x1b0 fs/namei.c:3563
> > do_sys_open+0x3b3/0x4f0 fs/open.c:1089
> > __do_sys_open fs/open.c:1107 [inline]
> > __se_sys_open fs/open.c:1102 [inline]
> > __x64_sys_open+0x55/0x70 fs/open.c:1102
> > do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> >
> > write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7813 on cpu 1:
> > task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
> > pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
> > pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
> > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
> > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
> > lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
> > walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
> > lookup_last fs/namei.c:2271 [inline]
> > path_lookupat.isra.0+0x13a/0x5a0 fs/namei.c:2316
> > filename_lookup+0x145/0x2d0 fs/namei.c:2346
> > user_path_at_empty+0x4c/0x70 fs/namei.c:2606
> > user_path_at include/linux/namei.h:60 [inline]
> > vfs_statx+0xd9/0x190 fs/stat.c:187
> > vfs_stat include/linux/fs.h:3188 [inline]
> > __do_sys_newstat+0x51/0xb0 fs/stat.c:341
> > __se_sys_newstat fs/stat.c:337 [inline]
> > __x64_sys_newstat+0x3a/0x50 fs/stat.c:337
> > do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> >
> > Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
> > CPU: 1 PID: 7813 Comm: ps Not tainted 5.3.0+ #0
> > Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
> > Google 01/01/2011
> > ==================================================================
>
> My understanding is, that for every access to /proc/<pid>,
> d_revalidate is called, and /proc-fs implementation simply says that
> pid_revalidate always revalidates by rewriting uid/gid because "owning
> task may have performed a setuid(), etc." presumably so every access
> to a /proc/<pid> entry always has the right uid/gid (in effect
> updating /proc/<pid> lazily via d_revalidate).
>
> Is it possible that one of the tasks above could be preempted after
> doing its writes to *ruid/*rgid, another thread writing some other
> values (after setuid / seteuid), and then the preempted thread seeing
> the other values? Assertion here should never fail:
> === TASK 1 ===
> | seteuid(1000);
> | seteuid(0);
> | stat("/proc/<pid-of-task-1>", &fstat);
> | assert(fstat.st_uid == 0);
> === TASK 2 ===
> | stat("/proc/<pid-of-task-1>", ...);
Is it the same as
pid_revalidate() snapshots (uid,gid) correctly
but writeback is done in any order?
On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 20:17, Alexey Dobriyan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 02:56:47PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 14:36, syzbot
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > syzbot found the following crash on:
> > >
> > > HEAD commit: d724f94f x86, kcsan: Enable KCSAN for x86
> > > git tree: https://github.com/google/ktsan.git kcsan
> > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=17884db3600000
> > > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=c0906aa620713d80
> > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=e392f8008a294fdf8891
> > > compiler: gcc (GCC) 9.0.0 20181231 (experimental)
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this crash yet.
> > >
> > > IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > > Reported-by: [email protected]
> > >
> > > ==================================================================
> > > BUG: KCSAN: data-race in task_dump_owner / task_dump_owner
> > >
> > > write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7804 on cpu 0:
> > > task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
> > > pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
> > > pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
> > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
> > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
> > > lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
> > > walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
> > > link_path_walk.part.0+0x5d3/0xa90 fs/namei.c:2139
> > > link_path_walk fs/namei.c:2070 [inline]
> > > path_openat+0x14f/0x3530 fs/namei.c:3532
> > > do_filp_open+0x11e/0x1b0 fs/namei.c:3563
> > > do_sys_open+0x3b3/0x4f0 fs/open.c:1089
> > > __do_sys_open fs/open.c:1107 [inline]
> > > __se_sys_open fs/open.c:1102 [inline]
> > > __x64_sys_open+0x55/0x70 fs/open.c:1102
> > > do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
> > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> > >
> > > write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7813 on cpu 1:
> > > task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
> > > pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
> > > pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
> > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
> > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
> > > lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
> > > walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
> > > lookup_last fs/namei.c:2271 [inline]
> > > path_lookupat.isra.0+0x13a/0x5a0 fs/namei.c:2316
> > > filename_lookup+0x145/0x2d0 fs/namei.c:2346
> > > user_path_at_empty+0x4c/0x70 fs/namei.c:2606
> > > user_path_at include/linux/namei.h:60 [inline]
> > > vfs_statx+0xd9/0x190 fs/stat.c:187
> > > vfs_stat include/linux/fs.h:3188 [inline]
> > > __do_sys_newstat+0x51/0xb0 fs/stat.c:341
> > > __se_sys_newstat fs/stat.c:337 [inline]
> > > __x64_sys_newstat+0x3a/0x50 fs/stat.c:337
> > > do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
> > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> > >
> > > Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
> > > CPU: 1 PID: 7813 Comm: ps Not tainted 5.3.0+ #0
> > > Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
> > > Google 01/01/2011
> > > ==================================================================
> >
> > My understanding is, that for every access to /proc/<pid>,
> > d_revalidate is called, and /proc-fs implementation simply says that
> > pid_revalidate always revalidates by rewriting uid/gid because "owning
> > task may have performed a setuid(), etc." presumably so every access
> > to a /proc/<pid> entry always has the right uid/gid (in effect
> > updating /proc/<pid> lazily via d_revalidate).
> >
> > Is it possible that one of the tasks above could be preempted after
> > doing its writes to *ruid/*rgid, another thread writing some other
> > values (after setuid / seteuid), and then the preempted thread seeing
> > the other values? Assertion here should never fail:
> > === TASK 1 ===
> > | seteuid(1000);
> > | seteuid(0);
> > | stat("/proc/<pid-of-task-1>", &fstat);
> > | assert(fstat.st_uid == 0);
> > === TASK 2 ===
> > | stat("/proc/<pid-of-task-1>", ...);
>
> Is it the same as
> pid_revalidate() snapshots (uid,gid) correctly
> but writeback is done in any order?
Yes, I think so. Snapshot is done in RCU reader critical section, but
the writes can race with another thread. Is there logic that ensures
this doesn't lead to the observable outcome above?
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 8:33 PM 'Marco Elver' via syzkaller-bugs
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 20:17, Alexey Dobriyan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 02:56:47PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 14:36, syzbot
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > syzbot found the following crash on:
> > > >
> > > > HEAD commit: d724f94f x86, kcsan: Enable KCSAN for x86
> > > > git tree: https://github.com/google/ktsan.git kcsan
> > > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=17884db3600000
> > > > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=c0906aa620713d80
> > > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=e392f8008a294fdf8891
> > > > compiler: gcc (GCC) 9.0.0 20181231 (experimental)
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this crash yet.
> > > >
> > > > IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > > > Reported-by: [email protected]
> > > >
> > > > ==================================================================
> > > > BUG: KCSAN: data-race in task_dump_owner / task_dump_owner
> > > >
> > > > write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7804 on cpu 0:
> > > > task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
> > > > pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
> > > > pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
> > > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
> > > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
> > > > lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
> > > > walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
> > > > link_path_walk.part.0+0x5d3/0xa90 fs/namei.c:2139
> > > > link_path_walk fs/namei.c:2070 [inline]
> > > > path_openat+0x14f/0x3530 fs/namei.c:3532
> > > > do_filp_open+0x11e/0x1b0 fs/namei.c:3563
> > > > do_sys_open+0x3b3/0x4f0 fs/open.c:1089
> > > > __do_sys_open fs/open.c:1107 [inline]
> > > > __se_sys_open fs/open.c:1102 [inline]
> > > > __x64_sys_open+0x55/0x70 fs/open.c:1102
> > > > do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
> > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> > > >
> > > > write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7813 on cpu 1:
> > > > task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
> > > > pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
> > > > pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
> > > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
> > > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
> > > > lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
> > > > walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
> > > > lookup_last fs/namei.c:2271 [inline]
> > > > path_lookupat.isra.0+0x13a/0x5a0 fs/namei.c:2316
> > > > filename_lookup+0x145/0x2d0 fs/namei.c:2346
> > > > user_path_at_empty+0x4c/0x70 fs/namei.c:2606
> > > > user_path_at include/linux/namei.h:60 [inline]
> > > > vfs_statx+0xd9/0x190 fs/stat.c:187
> > > > vfs_stat include/linux/fs.h:3188 [inline]
> > > > __do_sys_newstat+0x51/0xb0 fs/stat.c:341
> > > > __se_sys_newstat fs/stat.c:337 [inline]
> > > > __x64_sys_newstat+0x3a/0x50 fs/stat.c:337
> > > > do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
> > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> > > >
> > > > Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
> > > > CPU: 1 PID: 7813 Comm: ps Not tainted 5.3.0+ #0
> > > > Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
> > > > Google 01/01/2011
> > > > ==================================================================
> > >
> > > My understanding is, that for every access to /proc/<pid>,
> > > d_revalidate is called, and /proc-fs implementation simply says that
> > > pid_revalidate always revalidates by rewriting uid/gid because "owning
> > > task may have performed a setuid(), etc." presumably so every access
> > > to a /proc/<pid> entry always has the right uid/gid (in effect
> > > updating /proc/<pid> lazily via d_revalidate).
> > >
> > > Is it possible that one of the tasks above could be preempted after
> > > doing its writes to *ruid/*rgid, another thread writing some other
> > > values (after setuid / seteuid), and then the preempted thread seeing
> > > the other values? Assertion here should never fail:
> > > === TASK 1 ===
> > > | seteuid(1000);
> > > | seteuid(0);
> > > | stat("/proc/<pid-of-task-1>", &fstat);
> > > | assert(fstat.st_uid == 0);
> > > === TASK 2 ===
> > > | stat("/proc/<pid-of-task-1>", ...);
> >
> > Is it the same as
> > pid_revalidate() snapshots (uid,gid) correctly
> > but writeback is done in any order?
>
> Yes, I think so. Snapshot is done in RCU reader critical section, but
> the writes can race with another thread. Is there logic that ensures
> this doesn't lead to the observable outcome above?
I found the case where this leads to an observable bug.
common_perm_cond() in security/apparmor/lsm.c reads the inode uid and
uses it for the security check:
static int common_perm_cond(const char *op, const struct path *path, u32 mask)
{
struct path_cond cond = { d_backing_inode(path->dentry)->i_uid,
d_backing_inode(path->dentry)->i_mode
};
Now consider the following test program:
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <pthread.h>
void *thr(void *arg)
{
for (;;) {
struct stat file_stat;
stat((char*)arg, &file_stat);
}
return 0;
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
char proc[32];
sprintf(proc, "/proc/%d", getpid());
printf("%s\n", proc);
pthread_t th;
pthread_create(&th, 0, thr, proc);
for (;;) {
seteuid(1000);
usleep(1);
seteuid(0);
struct stat file_stat;
stat(proc, &file_stat);
}
return 0;
}
Whenever the main thread does stat, it must observe inode.uid == 0 in
common_perm_cond().
But since task_dump_owner() does writeback out of order, it can lead
to non-linearizable executions and main thread observing inode.uid ==
1000.
This in turn can lead to both false negatives and false positives from
AppArmour (false denying access and falsely permitting access).
I don't know how to setup actual AppArmour profile to do this, but I
see this guide mentions "owner @{PROC}/[0-9]*" in a policy, so I
assume it's possible:
https://gitlab.com/apparmor/apparmor/wikis/Profiling_by_hand
Instead, I added the following check to common_perm_cond() (it's
dirty, but you get the idea):
@@ -218,6 +218,15 @@ static int common_perm_cond(const char *op, const
struct path *path, u32 mask)
d_backing_inode(path->dentry)->i_mode
};
+ if (op == OP_GETATTR && mask == AA_MAY_GETATTR && cond.uid.val != 0) {
+ char buf1[64], buf2[64];
+ char *str = d_path(path, buf1, sizeof(buf1));
+ sprintf(buf2, "/proc/%d", current->pid);
+ if (!strcmp(str, buf2))
+ pr_err("common_perm_cond: path=%s pid=%d uid=%d\n",
+ str, current->pid, cond.uid.val);
+ }
Now when I run the program, I see how it fires every few seconds:
# ./a.out
/proc/1548
[ 123.233107] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
[ 126.142869] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
[ 127.048353] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
[ 128.181873] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
[ 128.557104] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
[ 144.690774] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
Which means AppArmour acts based on the wrong UID. Obviously can lead
to falsely denying access, but also falsely permitting access.
Consider the following scenario.
A process sets owner UID on a file so that a child process won't be
able to access it, after that it starts the child process.
common_perm_cond() in the child process should observe the new owner
UID. However, if there a random other process simply doing stat() or
something similar on the file, now the common_perm_cond() in the child
can suddenly observe the old UID, which will be permitted by
AppArmour. Boom!
I've tried to apply "proc: fix inode uid/gid writeback race":
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191020173010.GA14744@avx2/
but it does _not_ help because it does not really resolve the
non-atomic snapshot and writeback of UID.
On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 7:06 PM Dmitry Vyukov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 8:33 PM 'Marco Elver' via syzkaller-bugs
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 20:17, Alexey Dobriyan <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 02:56:47PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 14:36, syzbot
> > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > syzbot found the following crash on:
> > > > >
> > > > > HEAD commit: d724f94f x86, kcsan: Enable KCSAN for x86
> > > > > git tree: https://github.com/google/ktsan.git kcsan
> > > > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=17884db3600000
> > > > > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=c0906aa620713d80
> > > > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=e392f8008a294fdf8891
> > > > > compiler: gcc (GCC) 9.0.0 20181231 (experimental)
> > > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this crash yet.
> > > > >
> > > > > IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > > > > Reported-by: [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > > ==================================================================
> > > > > BUG: KCSAN: data-race in task_dump_owner / task_dump_owner
> > > > >
> > > > > write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7804 on cpu 0:
> > > > > task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
> > > > > pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
> > > > > pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
> > > > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
> > > > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
> > > > > lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
> > > > > walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
> > > > > link_path_walk.part.0+0x5d3/0xa90 fs/namei.c:2139
> > > > > link_path_walk fs/namei.c:2070 [inline]
> > > > > path_openat+0x14f/0x3530 fs/namei.c:3532
> > > > > do_filp_open+0x11e/0x1b0 fs/namei.c:3563
> > > > > do_sys_open+0x3b3/0x4f0 fs/open.c:1089
> > > > > __do_sys_open fs/open.c:1107 [inline]
> > > > > __se_sys_open fs/open.c:1102 [inline]
> > > > > __x64_sys_open+0x55/0x70 fs/open.c:1102
> > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
> > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> > > > >
> > > > > write to 0xffff8881255bb7fc of 4 bytes by task 7813 on cpu 1:
> > > > > task_dump_owner+0xd8/0x260 fs/proc/base.c:1742
> > > > > pid_update_inode+0x3c/0x70 fs/proc/base.c:1818
> > > > > pid_revalidate+0x91/0xd0 fs/proc/base.c:1841
> > > > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:765 [inline]
> > > > > d_revalidate fs/namei.c:762 [inline]
> > > > > lookup_fast+0x7cb/0x7e0 fs/namei.c:1613
> > > > > walk_component+0x6d/0xe80 fs/namei.c:1804
> > > > > lookup_last fs/namei.c:2271 [inline]
> > > > > path_lookupat.isra.0+0x13a/0x5a0 fs/namei.c:2316
> > > > > filename_lookup+0x145/0x2d0 fs/namei.c:2346
> > > > > user_path_at_empty+0x4c/0x70 fs/namei.c:2606
> > > > > user_path_at include/linux/namei.h:60 [inline]
> > > > > vfs_statx+0xd9/0x190 fs/stat.c:187
> > > > > vfs_stat include/linux/fs.h:3188 [inline]
> > > > > __do_sys_newstat+0x51/0xb0 fs/stat.c:341
> > > > > __se_sys_newstat fs/stat.c:337 [inline]
> > > > > __x64_sys_newstat+0x3a/0x50 fs/stat.c:337
> > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcf/0x2f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:296
> > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> > > > >
> > > > > Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
> > > > > CPU: 1 PID: 7813 Comm: ps Not tainted 5.3.0+ #0
> > > > > Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
> > > > > Google 01/01/2011
> > > > > ==================================================================
> > > >
> > > > My understanding is, that for every access to /proc/<pid>,
> > > > d_revalidate is called, and /proc-fs implementation simply says that
> > > > pid_revalidate always revalidates by rewriting uid/gid because "owning
> > > > task may have performed a setuid(), etc." presumably so every access
> > > > to a /proc/<pid> entry always has the right uid/gid (in effect
> > > > updating /proc/<pid> lazily via d_revalidate).
> > > >
> > > > Is it possible that one of the tasks above could be preempted after
> > > > doing its writes to *ruid/*rgid, another thread writing some other
> > > > values (after setuid / seteuid), and then the preempted thread seeing
> > > > the other values? Assertion here should never fail:
> > > > === TASK 1 ===
> > > > | seteuid(1000);
> > > > | seteuid(0);
> > > > | stat("/proc/<pid-of-task-1>", &fstat);
> > > > | assert(fstat.st_uid == 0);
> > > > === TASK 2 ===
> > > > | stat("/proc/<pid-of-task-1>", ...);
> > >
> > > Is it the same as
> > > pid_revalidate() snapshots (uid,gid) correctly
> > > but writeback is done in any order?
> >
> > Yes, I think so. Snapshot is done in RCU reader critical section, but
> > the writes can race with another thread. Is there logic that ensures
> > this doesn't lead to the observable outcome above?
>
>
> I found the case where this leads to an observable bug.
> common_perm_cond() in security/apparmor/lsm.c reads the inode uid and
> uses it for the security check:
>
> static int common_perm_cond(const char *op, const struct path *path, u32 mask)
> {
> struct path_cond cond = { d_backing_inode(path->dentry)->i_uid,
>
> d_backing_inode(path->dentry)->i_mode
> };
>
> Now consider the following test program:
>
> #define _GNU_SOURCE
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <sys/stat.h>
> #include <sys/types.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <pthread.h>
>
> void *thr(void *arg)
> {
> for (;;) {
> struct stat file_stat;
> stat((char*)arg, &file_stat);
> }
> return 0;
> }
>
> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> char proc[32];
> sprintf(proc, "/proc/%d", getpid());
> printf("%s\n", proc);
> pthread_t th;
> pthread_create(&th, 0, thr, proc);
> for (;;) {
> seteuid(1000);
> usleep(1);
> seteuid(0);
> struct stat file_stat;
> stat(proc, &file_stat);
> }
> return 0;
> }
>
> Whenever the main thread does stat, it must observe inode.uid == 0 in
> common_perm_cond().
>
> But since task_dump_owner() does writeback out of order, it can lead
> to non-linearizable executions and main thread observing inode.uid ==
> 1000.
> This in turn can lead to both false negatives and false positives from
> AppArmour (false denying access and falsely permitting access).
>
> I don't know how to setup actual AppArmour profile to do this, but I
> see this guide mentions "owner @{PROC}/[0-9]*" in a policy, so I
> assume it's possible:
> https://gitlab.com/apparmor/apparmor/wikis/Profiling_by_hand
>
> Instead, I added the following check to common_perm_cond() (it's
> dirty, but you get the idea):
>
> @@ -218,6 +218,15 @@ static int common_perm_cond(const char *op, const
> struct path *path, u32 mask)
> d_backing_inode(path->dentry)->i_mode
> };
> + if (op == OP_GETATTR && mask == AA_MAY_GETATTR && cond.uid.val != 0) {
> + char buf1[64], buf2[64];
> + char *str = d_path(path, buf1, sizeof(buf1));
> + sprintf(buf2, "/proc/%d", current->pid);
> + if (!strcmp(str, buf2))
> + pr_err("common_perm_cond: path=%s pid=%d uid=%d\n",
> + str, current->pid, cond.uid.val);
> + }
>
> Now when I run the program, I see how it fires every few seconds:
>
> # ./a.out
> /proc/1548
> [ 123.233107] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
> [ 126.142869] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
> [ 127.048353] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
> [ 128.181873] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
> [ 128.557104] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
> [ 144.690774] common_perm_cond: path=/proc/1548 pid=1548 uid=1000
>
> Which means AppArmour acts based on the wrong UID. Obviously can lead
> to falsely denying access, but also falsely permitting access.
> Consider the following scenario.
> A process sets owner UID on a file so that a child process won't be
> able to access it, after that it starts the child process.
> common_perm_cond() in the child process should observe the new owner
> UID. However, if there a random other process simply doing stat() or
> something similar on the file, now the common_perm_cond() in the child
> can suddenly observe the old UID, which will be permitted by
> AppArmour. Boom!
>
> I've tried to apply "proc: fix inode uid/gid writeback race":
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191020173010.GA14744@avx2/
> but it does _not_ help because it does not really resolve the
> non-atomic snapshot and writeback of UID.
FTR here is the corresponding race report:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/syzkaller-bugs/Cs07ly_Nmtg/avW672LrAQAJ