lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Oct]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 1/3] net: unix: fix use-after-free in unix_dgram_poll()
Date
Hi,

Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com> writes:

> The unix_dgram_poll() routine calls sock_poll_wait() not only for the wait
> queue associated with the socket s that we are poll'ing against, but also calls
> sock_poll_wait() for a remote peer socket p, if it is connected. Thus,
> if we call poll()/select()/epoll() for the socket s, there are then
> a couple of code paths in which the remote peer socket p and its associated
> peer_wait queue can be freed before poll()/select()/epoll() have a chance
> to remove themselves from the remote peer socket.
>
> The way that remote peer socket can be freed are:
>
> 1. If s calls connect() to a connect to a new socket other than p, it will
> drop its reference on p, and thus a close() on p will free it.
>
> 2. If we call close on p(), then a subsequent sendmsg() from s, will drop
> the final reference to p, allowing it to be freed.
>
> Address this issue, by reverting unix_dgram_poll() to only register with
> the wait queue associated with s and register a callback with the remote peer
> socket on connect() that will wake up the wait queue associated with s. If
> scenarios 1 or 2 occur above we then simply remove the callback from the
> remote peer. This then presents the expected semantics to poll()/select()/
> epoll().
>
> I've implemented this for sock-type, SOCK_RAW, SOCK_DGRAM, and SOCK_SEQPACKET
> but not for SOCK_STREAM, since SOCK_STREAM does not use unix_dgram_poll().
>
> Introduced in commit ec0d215f9420 ("af_unix: fix 'poll for write'/connected
> DGRAM sockets").
>
> Tested-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>

While I think this approach works, I haven't seen where the current code
leaks a reference. Assignment to unix_peer(sk) in general take spin_lock
and increment refcount. Are there bugs at the two places you referred
to?

Is an easier fix just to use atomic_inc_not_zero(&sk->sk_refcnt) in
unix_peer_get() which could also help other places?

Thanks,
Hannes


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-10-09 17:01    [W:0.401 / U:0.972 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site