Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A77B2C433EF for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 01:26:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232974AbiAJB0G (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Jan 2022 20:26:06 -0500 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.187]:34885 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232948AbiAJB0C (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Jan 2022 20:26:02 -0500 Received: from dggpeml500020.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.57]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4JXGNM2z7MzccD2; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 09:25:23 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.177.174] (10.174.177.174) by dggpeml500020.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.20; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 09:26:00 +0800 Subject: Re: Questions about the patch 054aa8d439b9 ("fget: check that the fd still exists after getting a ref to it") To: Linus Torvalds , , , Linux Kernel Mailing List CC: "zhangyi (F)" , YueHaibing , Baokun Li References: <58644a55-561d-4a2e-6741-589d013837f1@huawei.com> From: "libaokun (A)" Message-ID: <54d9c160-5ce8-6d08-31b6-b9b5ce81fd07@huawei.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 09:25:54 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <58644a55-561d-4a2e-6741-589d013837f1@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.177.174] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.181) To dggpeml500020.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.88) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Happy New Year! ping 在 2021/12/22 18:32, libaokun (A) 写道: >> From: Linus Torvalds >> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 10:06:14 -0800 >> Subject: fget: check that the fd still exists after getting a ref to it >> >> Jann Horn points out that there is another possible race wrt Unix domain >> socket garbage collection, somewhat reminiscent of the one fixed in >> commit cbcf01128d0a ("af_unix: fix garbage collect vs MSG_PEEK"). >> >> See the extended comment about the garbage collection requirements added >> to unix_peek_fds() by that commit for details. >> >> The race comes from how we can locklessly look up a file descriptor just >> as it is in the process of being closed, and with the right artificial >> timing (Jann added a few strategic 'mdelay(500)' calls to do that), the >> Unix domain socket garbage collector could see the reference count >> decrement of the close() happen before fget() took its reference to the >> file and the file was attached onto a new file descriptor. > > I analyzed this CVE and tried to reproduce it. > > I guess he triggered it like the stack below. > > > close_fd                               | >  pick_file                             | >                                        | __fget_files > file = files_lookup_fd_rcu(files, fd); | >                                        | > rcu_assign_pointer(fdt->fd[fd], NULL); >  filp_close                            | >   fput                                 | >                                        | get_file_rcu_many // ned ref>=1 >    fput_many(file, 1);                 | >     file_free(file);                   | >                                        |  return file >                                        |  // read-after-free > > > > If you want to successfully execute the get_file_rcu_many function, > > the reference counting of the file is greater than or equal to 1 and > > is greater than or equal to 2 after the execution. > > However, close releases only one reference count and does not release > the file, > > so read-after-free does not occur. So how is the race triggered here? > > The question has been pondered for a long time without any results. > > Could I get more details (e.g. reproduction methods or stacks) from you ? > > I would appreciate it if you could help me. > > >> This is all (intentionally) correct on the 'struct file *' side, with >> RCU lookups and lockless reference counting very much part of the >> design. Getting that reference count out of order isn't a problem per >> se. >> >> But the garbage collector can get confused by seeing this situation of >> having seen a file not having any remaining external references and then >> seeing it being attached to an fd. >> >> In commit cbcf01128d0a ("af_unix: fix garbage collect vs MSG_PEEK") the >> fix was to serialize the file descriptor install with the garbage >> collector by taking and releasing the unix_gc_lock. >> >> That's not really an option here, but since this all happens when we are >> in the process of looking up a file descriptor, we can instead simply >> just re-check that the file hasn't been closed in the meantime, and just >> re-do the lookup if we raced with a concurrent close() of the same file >> descriptor. >> >> Reported-and-tested-by: Jann Horn >> Acked-by: Miklos Szeredi >> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds >> --- >> fs/file.c | 4 ++++ >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/fs/file.c b/fs/file.c >> index 8627dacfc4246..ad4a8bf3cf109 100644 >> --- a/fs/file.c >> +++ b/fs/file.c >> @@ -858,6 +858,10 @@ loop: >> file = NULL; >> else if (!get_file_rcu_many(file, refs)) >> goto loop; >> + else if (files_lookup_fd_raw(files, fd) != file) { >> + fput_many(file, refs); >> + goto loop; >> + } >> } >> rcu_read_unlock(); >> -- cgit 1.2.3-1.el7 > > Looking forward to hearing from you. > > Thank you! >