LVS
lvs-devel
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

RE: get rid of the address_space override in setsockopt v2

To: 'Al Viro' <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: get rid of the address_space override in setsockopt v2
Cc: 'David Miller' <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "hch@xxxxxx" <hch@xxxxxx>, "kuba@xxxxxxxxxx" <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>, "ast@xxxxxxxxxx" <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>, "daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx" <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "coreteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <coreteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-sctp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-sctp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-hams@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-hams@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-bluetooth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-bluetooth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-can@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-can@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "dccp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <dccp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-decnet-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-decnet-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-wpan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-wpan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "mptcp@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <mptcp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "rds-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <rds-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-afs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-afs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "tipc-discussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <tipc-discussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-x25@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-x25@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: David Laight <David.Laight@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 14:09:09 +0000
From: Al Viro
> Sent: 27 July 2020 14:48
> 
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:51:45AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> 
> > I'm sure there is code that processes options in chunks.
> > This probably means it is possible to put a chunk boundary
> > at the end of userspace and continue processing the very start
> > of kernel memory.
> >
> > At best this faults on the kernel copy code and crashes the system.
> 
> Really?  Care to provide some details, or is it another of your "I can't
> be possibly arsed to check what I'm saying, but it stands for reason
> that..." specials?

I did more 'homework' than sometimes :-)
Slightly difficult without a searchable net-next tree.
However, as has been pointed out is a different thread
this code is used to update IPv6 flow labels:

> > -           if (copy_from_user(fl->opt+1, optval+CMSG_ALIGN(sizeof(*freq)), 
> > olen))
> > +           sockptr_advance(optval, CMSG_ALIGN(sizeof(*freq)));
> > +           if (copy_from_sockptr(fl->opt + 1, optval, olen))
> >                     goto done;

and doesn't work because the advances are no longer cumulative.

Now access_ok() has to take the base address and length to stop
'running into' kernel space, but the code above can advance from
a valid user pointer (which won't fault) to a kernel address.

If there were always an unmapped 'guard' page in the user address
space the access_ok() check prior to copy_to/from_user() wouldn't
need the length.
So I surmise that no such guard page exists and so the above
can advance from user addresses into kernel ones.

        David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, 
UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>