All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com, baoyou.xie@linaro.org,
	peter.chen@nxp.com, william wu <wulf@rock-chips.com>,
	wsa-dev@sang-engineering.com, javier@osg.samsung.com,
	Chris Bainbridge <chris.bainbridge@gmail.com>,
	USB list <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: usb: use-after-free write in usb_hcd_link_urb_to_ep
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:32:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACT4Y+azbbX4EQJFJWkRwkWQN6S0i6kQ+5yJUxW04SaJBS5svw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+b0CoZY7S+OYjYBdJv6z1tTVqrE+awxUhiC5=bShpgxdg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 23 Mar 2017, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>
>>> > Putting these together:
>>> >
>>> >         The memory was allocated in usb_internal_control_msg() line 93.
>>> >         The later events occurred within the call in line 100 to
>>> >         usb_start_wait_urb().
>>> >
>>> >         The invalid access occurred within usb_start_wait_urb() line 56.
>>> >
>>> >         The memory was deallocated within usb_start_wait_urb() line 78.
>>> >
>>> > Since these routines don't involve any loops or backward jumps, this
>>> > says that the invalid access occurred before the memory was
>>> > deallocated!  So why is it reported as a problem?
>>>
>>>
>>> My first guess would be that pid 3348 did 2 calls to open and the urb
>>> was somehow referenced across these calls. Is it possible?
>>
>> I don't think so.  The URB gets allocated and deallocated separately
>> for each call.  You can see this very plainly by reading the source
>> code for usb_internal_control_msg() and usb_start_wait_urb().
>>
>> It's possible that the same memory location was allocated and
>> deallocated for two different calls at different times.  That wouldn't
>> fool syzkaller, would it?
>
>
> Generally it does not fool KASAN because of heap memory quarantine.
> I will take a closer look tomorrow.
> Thanks for looking into this.


The bug looks real to me and it can be easily reproduced by executing:

mmap(&(0x7f0000000000/0xfff000)=nil, (0xfff000), 0x3, 0x32,
0xffffffffffffffff, 0x0)
syz_open_dev$usb(&(0x7f0000001000-0x15)="2f6465762f6275732f7573622f3030232f30302300",
0x1ff, 0x200)
syz_open_dev$usb(&(0x7f0000002000-0x15)="2f6465762f6275732f7573622f3030232f30302300",
0x3f, 0x0)

and failing 7-th malloc in the first one, this one:

 kzalloc include/linux/slab.h:663 [inline]
 rh_call_control drivers/usb/core/hcd.c:522 [inline]

>From the report:

(from the failure stack)
kmalloc in rh_call_control fails, and it straight returns -ENOMEM
without calling  usb_hcd_unlink_urb_from_ep(hcd, urb) leaving urb
linked into hcd (and that's probably the root problem)
consequently:
rh_urb_enqueue return -ENOMEM
usb_hcd_submit_urb does INIT_LIST_HEAD(&urb->urb_list), but the urb is
still linked, so we got corrupted list
(from the free stack)
eventually usb_start_wait_urb frees the still linked urb by calling usb_free_urb
(form the use-after-free stack)
the subsequent open links a new urb into the corrupted list in
usb_hcd_link_urb_to_ep
bang!

  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-24 10:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-23 12:17 usb: use-after-free write in usb_hcd_link_urb_to_ep Dmitry Vyukov
2017-03-23 14:34 ` Alan Stern
2017-03-23 14:39   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-03-23 15:04     ` Alan Stern
2017-03-23 15:22       ` Dmitry Vyukov
2017-03-24 10:32         ` Dmitry Vyukov [this message]
2017-03-24 14:27           ` Alan Stern
2017-03-24 17:11             ` Dmitry Vyukov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CACT4Y+azbbX4EQJFJWkRwkWQN6S0i6kQ+5yJUxW04SaJBS5svw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=baoyou.xie@linaro.org \
    --cc=chris.bainbridge@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=javier@osg.samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=peter.chen@nxp.com \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=syzkaller@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=wsa-dev@sang-engineering.com \
    --cc=wulf@rock-chips.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.