lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
SubjectRe: KASAN: use-after-free Read in vhost_chr_write_iter
From
Date


On 2018年05月18日 17:24, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 2018年05月17日 21:45, DaeRyong Jeong wrote:
>> We report the crash: KASAN: use-after-free Read in vhost_chr_write_iter
>>
>> This crash has been found in v4.17-rc1 using RaceFuzzer (a modified
>> version of Syzkaller), which we describe more at the end of this
>> report. Our analysis shows that the race occurs when invoking two
>> syscalls concurrently, write$vnet and ioctl$VHOST_RESET_OWNER.
>>
>>
>> Analysis:
>> We think the concurrent execution of vhost_process_iotlb_msg() and
>> vhost_dev_cleanup() causes the crash.
>> Both of functions can run concurrently (please see call sequence below),
>> and possibly, there is a race on dev->iotlb.
>> If the switch occurs right after vhost_dev_cleanup() frees
>> dev->iotlb, vhost_process_iotlb_msg() still sees the non-null value
>> and it
>> keep executing without returning -EFAULT. Consequently, use-after-free
>> occures
>>
>>
>> Thread interleaving:
>> CPU0 (vhost_process_iotlb_msg)                CPU1 (vhost_dev_cleanup)
>> (In the case of both VHOST_IOTLB_UPDATE and
>> VHOST_IOTLB_INVALIDATE)
>> =====                            =====
>>                             vhost_umem_clean(dev->iotlb);
>> if (!dev->iotlb) {
>>             ret = -EFAULT;
>>                 break;
>> }
>>                             dev->iotlb = NULL;
>>
>>
>> Call Sequence:
>> CPU0
>> =====
>> vhost_net_chr_write_iter
>>     vhost_chr_write_iter
>>         vhost_process_iotlb_msg
>>
>> CPU1
>> =====
>> vhost_net_ioctl
>>     vhost_net_reset_owner
>>         vhost_dev_reset_owner
>>             vhost_dev_cleanup
>
> Thanks a lot for the analysis.
>
> This could be addressed by simply protect it with dev mutex.
>
> Will post a patch.
>

Could you please help to test the attached patch? I've done some smoking
test.

Thanks
From 88328386f3f652e684ee33dc4cf63dcaed871aea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 17:33:27 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] vhost: synchronize IOTLB message with dev cleanup

DaeRyong Jeong reports a race between vhost_dev_cleanup() and
vhost_process_iotlb_msg():

Thread interleaving:
CPU0 (vhost_process_iotlb_msg) CPU1 (vhost_dev_cleanup)
(In the case of both VHOST_IOTLB_UPDATE and
VHOST_IOTLB_INVALIDATE)
===== =====
vhost_umem_clean(dev->iotlb);
if (!dev->iotlb) {
ret = -EFAULT;
break;
}
dev->iotlb = NULL;

The reason is we don't synchronize between them, fixing by protecting
vhost_process_iotlb_msg() with dev mutex.

Reported-by: DaeRyong Jeong <threeearcat@gmail.com>
Fixes: 6b1e6cc7855b0 ("vhost: new device IOTLB API")
Reported-by: DaeRyong Jeong <threeearcat@gmail.com>
---
drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
index f3bd8e9..f0be5f3 100644
--- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
+++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
@@ -981,6 +981,7 @@ static int vhost_process_iotlb_msg(struct vhost_dev *dev,
{
int ret = 0;

+ mutex_lock(&dev->mutex);
vhost_dev_lock_vqs(dev);
switch (msg->type) {
case VHOST_IOTLB_UPDATE:
@@ -1016,6 +1017,8 @@ static int vhost_process_iotlb_msg(struct vhost_dev *dev,
}

vhost_dev_unlock_vqs(dev);
+ mutex_unlock(&dev->mutex);
+
return ret;
}
ssize_t vhost_chr_write_iter(struct vhost_dev *dev,
--
2.7.4
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-21 04:38    [W:0.081 / U:1.800 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site