[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [3.3-rc7] sys_poll use after free (hibernate)
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Eric W. Biederman
<> wrote:
> Lucas De Marchi <> writes:
>> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Al Viro <> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 12:02:04PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>>> and that load is from
>>>>     poll_wait(filp, &table->poll->wait, wait);
>>>> where the testing of %rsi and %rcx are the "if (p && wait_address)"
>>>> check in poll_wait(), and %rsi is "table->poll" if I read it all
>>>> correctly.
>>>> And the 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b pattern is obviously POISON_FREE, so
>>>> apparently 'table' has already been freed.
>>>> I suspect the whole sysctl 'poll' code is seriously broken, since it
>>>> seems to depend on those ctl_table pointers being stable over the
>>>> whole open/close sequence, but if somebody unregisters the sysctl,
>>>> it's all gone. The ctl_table doesn't have any refcounting etc, and I
>>>> suspect that your hibernate sequence ends up unregistering some sysctl
>>>> (perhaps as part of a module unload?)
>> How could that happen if the only files that support poll  right now
>> on sysctl are kernel/hostname and kernel/domainname?
>>> Ewww...  The way it was supposed to work (prio to ->poll() madness) was
>>> that actual IO gets wrapped into grab_header()/sysctl_head_finish()
>>> pair.  proc_sys_poll() doesn't do it, so yes, that post-mortem is
>>> very likely to be correct.
>> Yes, it  seems like I forgot to call grab_header() there, sorry for
>> that. I'll prepare a patch and send you later today. I just wonder
>> what is happening to reach that code... :-/
> It looks like it was a combination of the fuzzer doing silly things
> and a removed ctl_table entry being poisoned and having .poll set
> to 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b so the guard against calling poll when it is
> nonsense did not trigger.  So your patch should be sufficient
> for now.

What I understood afterwards was:

1. fuzzer calling poll() on files that did support poll
2. modules that created that sysctl entries were removed
3. 'table' was entirely removed (not ->poll).

> Long term we still need a version of poll that is safe to use
> with modules.

I think the way it's now (with my patch taken by Andrew) is safe for
having poll() with modules.

Lucas De Marchi
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-22 23:15    [W:0.148 / U:0.704 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site