Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 12 Aug 2022 12:25:09 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Siddh Raman Pant <code@siddh.me>
Cc:     "Greg KH" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "johannes berg" <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
        "david s. miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "eric dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
        "paolo abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "netdev" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "syzbot+6cb476b7c69916a0caca" 
        <syzbot+6cb476b7c69916a0caca@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        "linux-wireless" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "syzbot+f9acff9bf08a845f225d" 
        <syzbot+f9acff9bf08a845f225d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        "syzbot+9250865a55539d384347" 
        <syzbot+9250865a55539d384347@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        "linux-kernel-mentees" 
        <linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] wifi: cfg80211: Fix UAF in ieee80211_scan_rx()
Message-ID: <20220812122509.281f0536@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <18292e1dcd8.2359a549180213.8185874405406307019@siddh.me>
References: <20220726123921.29664-1-code@siddh.me>
        <18291779771.584fa6ab156295.3990923778713440655@siddh.me>
        <YvZEfnjGIpH6XjsD@kroah.com>
        <18292791718.88f48d22175003.6675210189148271554@siddh.me>
        <YvZxfpY4JUqvsOG5@kroah.com>
        <18292e1dcd8.2359a549180213.8185874405406307019@siddh.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 21:57:31 +0530 Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 20:57:58 +0530  Greg KH  wrote:
> > rcu just delays freeing of an object, you might just be delaying the
> > race condition.  Just moving a single object to be freed with rcu feels
> > very odd if you don't have another reference somewhere.  
> 
> As mentioned in patch message, in net/mac80211/scan.c, we have:
>         void ieee80211_scan_rx(struct ieee80211_local *local, struct sk_buff *skb)
>         {
>                 ...
>                 scan_req = rcu_dereference(local->scan_req);
>                 sched_scan_req = rcu_dereference(local->sched_scan_req);
> 
>                 if (scan_req)
>                         scan_req_flags = scan_req->flags;
>                 ...
>         }
> 
> So scan_req is probably supposed to be protected by RCU.
> 
> Also, in ieee80211_local's definition at net/mac80211/ieee80211_i.h, we have:
>         struct cfg80211_scan_request __rcu *scan_req;
> 
> Thus, scan_req is indeed supposed to be protected by RCU, which this patch
> addresses by adding a RCU head to the type's struct, and using kfree_rcu().
> 
> The above snippet is where the UAF happens (you can refer to syzkaller's log),
> because __cfg80211_scan_done() is called and frees the pointer.

Similarly to Greg, I'm not very familiar with the code base but one
sure way to move things forward would be to point out a commit which
broke things and put it in a Fixes tag. Much easier to validate a fix
by looking at where things went wrong.