Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 8076AC433CA
Date:   Mon, 15 Jun 2020 15:23:16 +0530
From:   Sahitya Tummala <stummala@codeaurora.org>
To:     Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>
Cc:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>,
        Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>,
        linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stummala@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: fix use-after-free when accessing
 bio->bi_crypt_context
Message-ID: <20200615095316.GB2916@codeaurora.org>
References: <1592193588-21701-1-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org>
 <20200615050019.GA3100@sol.localdomain>
 <20200615061633.GA23467@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200615061633.GA23467@google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Satya,

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 06:16:33AM +0000, Satya Tangirala wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 10:00:19PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 09:29:48AM +0530, Sahitya Tummala wrote:
> > > There could be a potential race between these two paths below,
> > > leading to use-after-free when accessing bio->bi_crypt_context.
> > > 
> > > f2fs_write_cache_pages
> > > ->f2fs_do_write_data_page on page#1
> > >   ->f2fs_inplace_write_data
> > >     ->f2fs_merge_page_bio
> > >       ->add_bio_entry
> > > ->f2fs_do_write_data_page on page#2
> > >   ->f2fs_inplace_write_data
> > >     ->f2fs_merge_page_bio
> > >       ->f2fs_crypt_mergeable_bio
> > >         ->fscrypt_mergeable_bio
> > >   				       f2fs_write_begin on page#1
> > > 				       ->f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback
> > > 				         ->f2fs_submit_merged_ipu_write
> > > 					   ->__submit_bio
> > > 					The bio gets completed, calling
> > > 					bio_endio
> > > 					->bio_uninit
> > > 					  ->bio_crypt_free_ctx
> > > 	  ->use-after-free issue
> > > 
> > > Fix this by moving f2fs_crypt_mergeable_bio() check within
> > > add_ipu_page() so that it's done under bio_list_lock to prevent
> > > the above race.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 15e76ad23e72 ("f2fs: add inline encryption support")
> > > Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@codeaurora.org>
> > > ---
> > > This fix is rebased to the tip of fscrypt git -
> > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/fscrypt/fscrypt.git
> > > branch - inline-encryption
> > > 
> > >  fs/f2fs/data.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++--------
> > >  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > index 0dfa8d3..3b53554 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > > @@ -762,9 +762,10 @@ static void del_bio_entry(struct bio_entry *be)
> > >  	kmem_cache_free(bio_entry_slab, be);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > -static int add_ipu_page(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct bio **bio,
> > > -							struct page *page)
> > > +static int add_ipu_page(struct f2fs_io_info *fio, struct bio **bio,
> > > +				struct page *page, int *bio_needs_submit)
> > >  {
> > > +	struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = fio->sbi;
> > >  	enum temp_type temp;
> > >  	bool found = false;
> > >  	int ret = -EAGAIN;
> > > @@ -780,6 +781,15 @@ static int add_ipu_page(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct bio **bio,
> > >  				continue;
> > >  
> > >  			found = true;
> > > +			if (*bio && (!page_is_mergeable(sbi, *bio,
> > > +					*fio->last_block, fio->new_blkaddr) ||
> > > +				    !f2fs_crypt_mergeable_bio(*bio,
> > > +					  fio->page->mapping->host,
> > > +					  fio->page->index, fio))) {
> > > +				ret = 0;
> > > +				*bio_needs_submit = 1;
> > > +				break;
> > > +			}
> > >  
> > >  			if (bio_add_page(*bio, page, PAGE_SIZE, 0) ==
> > >  							PAGE_SIZE) {
> > > @@ -864,6 +874,7 @@ int f2fs_merge_page_bio(struct f2fs_io_info *fio)
> > >  	struct bio *bio = *fio->bio;
> > >  	struct page *page = fio->encrypted_page ?
> > >  			fio->encrypted_page : fio->page;
> > > +	int bio_needs_submit = 0;
> > >  
> > >  	if (!f2fs_is_valid_blkaddr(fio->sbi, fio->new_blkaddr,
> > >  			__is_meta_io(fio) ? META_GENERIC : DATA_GENERIC))
> > > @@ -872,11 +883,6 @@ int f2fs_merge_page_bio(struct f2fs_io_info *fio)
> > >  	trace_f2fs_submit_page_bio(page, fio);
> > >  	f2fs_trace_ios(fio, 0);
> > >  
> > > -	if (bio && (!page_is_mergeable(fio->sbi, bio, *fio->last_block,
> > > -				       fio->new_blkaddr) ||
> > > -		    !f2fs_crypt_mergeable_bio(bio, fio->page->mapping->host,
> > > -					      fio->page->index, fio)))
> > > -		f2fs_submit_merged_ipu_write(fio->sbi, &bio, NULL);
> > >  alloc_new:
> > >  	if (!bio) {
> > >  		bio = __bio_alloc(fio, BIO_MAX_PAGES);
> > > @@ -886,8 +892,12 @@ int f2fs_merge_page_bio(struct f2fs_io_info *fio)
> > >  
> > >  		add_bio_entry(fio->sbi, bio, page, fio->temp);
> > >  	} else {
> > > -		if (add_ipu_page(fio->sbi, &bio, page))
> > > +		if (add_ipu_page(fio, &bio, page, &bio_needs_submit))
> > > +			goto alloc_new;
> > > +		if (bio_needs_submit) {
> > > +			f2fs_submit_merged_ipu_write(fio->sbi, &bio, NULL);
> > >  			goto alloc_new;
> > > +		}
> > >  	}
> > >  
> > >  	if (fio->io_wbc)
> > 
> > Thanks, I'm still trying to understand this part of the code, but it's looking
> > like this is a real bug.  Do you also have a reproducer that produces a KASAN
> > report, or did you find this another way?
> > 
> > One comment: add_ipu_page() already submits the bio if it's full.  Wouldn't it
> > be better to use that instead of f2fs_submit_merged_ipu_write()?  I.e.:
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > index e9dcda80e599..d7a51dbe208b 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> > @@ -762,9 +762,10 @@ static void del_bio_entry(struct bio_entry *be)
> >  	kmem_cache_free(bio_entry_slab, be);
> >  }
> >  
> > -static int add_ipu_page(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct bio **bio,
> > +static int add_ipu_page(struct f2fs_io_info *fio, struct bio **bio,
> >  							struct page *page)
> >  {
> > +	struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = fio->sbi;
> >  	enum temp_type temp;
> >  	bool found = false;
> >  	int ret = -EAGAIN;
> > @@ -780,14 +781,18 @@ static int add_ipu_page(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct bio **bio,
> >  				continue;
> >  
> >  			found = true;
> > -
> > -			if (bio_add_page(*bio, page, PAGE_SIZE, 0) ==
> > -							PAGE_SIZE) {
> > +			if (page_is_mergeable(sbi, *bio, *fio->last_block,
> > +					      fio->new_blkaddr) &&
> > +			    f2fs_crypt_mergeable_bio(*bio,
> > +						      fio->page->mapping->host,
> > +						      fio->page->index, fio) &&
> > +			    bio_add_page(*bio, page,
> > +					 PAGE_SIZE, 0) == PAGE_SIZE) {
> >  				ret = 0;
> >  				break;
> >  			}
> >  
> > -			/* bio is full */
> > +			/* page can't be merged into bio; submit the bio */
> >  			del_bio_entry(be);
> >  			__submit_bio(sbi, *bio, DATA);
> >  			break;
> > @@ -872,11 +877,6 @@ int f2fs_merge_page_bio(struct f2fs_io_info *fio)
> >  	trace_f2fs_submit_page_bio(page, fio);
> >  	f2fs_trace_ios(fio, 0);
> >  
> > -	if (bio && (!page_is_mergeable(fio->sbi, bio, *fio->last_block,
> > -				       fio->new_blkaddr) ||
> > -		    !f2fs_crypt_mergeable_bio(bio, fio->page->mapping->host,
> > -					      fio->page->index, fio)))
> > -		f2fs_submit_merged_ipu_write(fio->sbi, &bio, NULL);
> >  alloc_new:
> >  	if (!bio) {
> >  		bio = __bio_alloc(fio, BIO_MAX_PAGES);
> > @@ -886,7 +886,7 @@ int f2fs_merge_page_bio(struct f2fs_io_info *fio)
> >  
> >  		add_bio_entry(fio->sbi, bio, page, fio->temp);
> >  	} else {
> > -		if (add_ipu_page(fio->sbi, &bio, page))
> > +		if (add_ipu_page(fio, &bio, page))
> >  			goto alloc_new;
> >  	}
> >  
> Thanks a lot for looking into this Sahitya! After reading the ipu code,
> I do think it's a bug. Regarding the patch itself, I was going to type
> out basically the same suggestion as Eric, so I definitely second his
> proposal :).
> 
> Should I fold this change into the original patch? Or keep it as a
> separate patch when I send out the fscrypt/f2fs inline encryption
> patches?

It may be good to keep it seperate as we already have the base FBE patches in
several downstream kernels, so this fix can be applied easily. But I will
leave it up to you to take a call on this.

Thanks,

-- 
--
Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.