Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] vt: vt_ioctl: fix VT_DISALLOCATE freeing in-use virtual console | From | Jiri Slaby <> | Date | Wed, 18 Mar 2020 14:15:00 +0100 |
| |
On 24. 02. 20, 9:19, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 09:04:33AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: >>> KASAN report: >>> BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in con_shutdown+0x76/0x80 drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:3278 >>> Write of size 8 at addr ffff88806a4ec108 by task syz_vt/129 >>> >>> CPU: 0 PID: 129 Comm: syz_vt Not tainted 5.6.0-rc2 #11 >>> Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS ?-20191223_100556-anatol 04/01/2014 >>> Call Trace: >>> [...] >>> con_shutdown+0x76/0x80 drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:3278 >>> release_tty+0xa8/0x410 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1514 >>> tty_release_struct+0x34/0x50 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1629 >>> tty_release+0x984/0xed0 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1789 >>> [...] >>> >>> Allocated by task 129: >>> [...] >>> kzalloc include/linux/slab.h:669 [inline] >>> vc_allocate drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:1085 [inline] >>> vc_allocate+0x1ac/0x680 drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:1066 >>> con_install+0x4d/0x3f0 drivers/tty/vt/vt.c:3229 >>> tty_driver_install_tty drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1228 [inline] >>> tty_init_dev+0x94/0x350 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1341 >>> tty_open_by_driver drivers/tty/tty_io.c:1987 [inline] >>> tty_open+0x3ca/0xb30 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:2035 >>> [...] >>> >>> Freed by task 130: >>> [...] >>> kfree+0xbf/0x1e0 mm/slab.c:3757 >>> vt_disallocate drivers/tty/vt/vt_ioctl.c:300 [inline] >>> vt_ioctl+0x16dc/0x1e30 drivers/tty/vt/vt_ioctl.c:818 >>> tty_ioctl+0x9db/0x11b0 drivers/tty/tty_io.c:2660 >> >> That means the associated tty_port is destroyed while the tty layer >> still has a tty on the top of it. That is a BUG anyway.
...
>> Locking tty_mutex here does not sound quite right. What about switching >> vc_data to proper refcounting based on tty_port? (Instead of doing >> tty_port_destroy and kfree in vt_disallocate*.) >> > > How would that work? We could make struct vc_data refcounted such that > VT_DISALLOCATE doesn't free it right away but rather it's freed in the next > con_shutdown(). But release_tty() still accesses tty->port afterwards, which is > part of the 'struct vc_data' that would have just been freed.
Yes, but if it does the same as pty, i.e. throwing tty_port in ->cleanup, not ->shutdown, that would work, right?
The initial requirement from tty_port is that it outlives tty. This was later lifted by pty to live at least till ->cleanup.
thanks, -- js suse labs
| |