From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07707C2D0A3 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 15:48:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB9B522246 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 15:48:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="ZAtPfAXU" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726931AbgKAPsP (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Nov 2020 10:48:15 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37316 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726499AbgKAPsP (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Nov 2020 10:48:15 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x643.google.com (mail-pl1-x643.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::643]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15F16C0617A6; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 07:48:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x643.google.com with SMTP id x23so5551105plr.6; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 07:48:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=MFqfoYF37r0SCDNbL3WFzSImlz9fo3l92Mt1S0RvLJ8=; b=ZAtPfAXU+ez6G3Sa36jiNuVtip9xuBJgSCR0eoVs0LXVlEPK3y3U1y5jGjhnOCzM3j eWNju6HB/54AK4dHhdTOagCy4vl27W9zS8wYVeMMDvBwmlR+mvNdwRsAPW/B7Fl+Y6Du MrexSdOy4IPya4mnY3m6ec0J3zCaaP/rps+siodyeNxfI0oikzV/wMkUwwZFAz6p+b78 2HtfvsIYZW1/Szn0J2TiHndSBmstCX5igdVt3zIWxZUqtxRKfxQHmAA0l0VgoIiRKcYy 6yjBrWwbcEXKCWf9uGpD5WSkBntEAh+mTSlQ0SmtL4HB4cLriFZyx7JbrOY6MMDQb04g vZUA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=MFqfoYF37r0SCDNbL3WFzSImlz9fo3l92Mt1S0RvLJ8=; b=Xiim99WTiPx99LsKCw1aFdOjqNx84s70BsdyP7QkzZz1Z03qVj4i+u8xBpJ+s/bUea AM+GWuz6zD0CBxc/jN75DLQ7vnC5sQ64ukc607mGH8Za/qA7ulc8I0ewcxCboY2eTbB4 rdI9WBq9pARWW8/1IvLtAFqYrjkHAbm3U6pq5f1ZxXm61oNUfsB+U/32BjlWOelB8RQb 05H4DKyiIrROAu3bFphgMr2n6/pMmKaKGbiECBjsTTvXl6Ay8jHpbu2seDdHb1E+mXgn ZrC/vqOdlr57tkaTkAWxvNZm63NMY/FfotEBSioFEM5fd5JKHpwylX6AnIUa0qt2alD4 Qmfw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531GeK0xdTnU87VHPW4rKVWZqarq+R1W/Kyv23cAMqbK+iH/TAnB gkmWuPfB2L2Mx+iu0eys0aM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxr/Q4EjhU1j+7NucdANt0DklHJ7+90yeKV+x6ytGW9EZCS9YxpzmCS09o8aJ85J+qqZyTl5Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:e20f:: with SMTP id a15mr12429354pjz.12.1604245694224; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 07:48:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from Thinkpad ([45.118.167.197]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m12sm9191897pgl.90.2020.11.01.07.48.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 01 Nov 2020 07:48:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2020 21:18:06 +0530 From: Anmol Karn To: Greg KH Cc: ralf@linux-mips.org, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, syzbot+a1c743815982d9496393@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, linux-hams@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH] net: rose: Fix Null pointer dereference in rose_send_frame() Message-ID: <20201101154806.GB56088@Thinkpad> References: <20201015001712.72976-1-anmol.karan123@gmail.com> <20201015051225.GA404970@kroah.com> <20201015141012.GB77038@Thinkpad> <20201015155051.GB66528@kroah.com> <20201030105413.GA32091@Thinkpad> <20201101110258.GA2925745@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201101110258.GA2925745@kroah.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 12:02:58PM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 04:24:13PM +0530, Anmol Karn wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 05:50:51PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 07:40:12PM +0530, Anmol Karn wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 07:12:25AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 05:47:12AM +0530, Anmol Karn wrote: > > > > > > In rose_send_frame(), when comparing two ax.25 addresses, it assigns rose_call to > > > > > > either global ROSE callsign or default port, but when the former block triggers and > > > > > > rose_call is assigned by (ax25_address *)neigh->dev->dev_addr, a NULL pointer is > > > > > > dereferenced by 'neigh' when dereferencing 'dev'. > > > > > > > > > > > > - net/rose/rose_link.c > > > > > > This bug seems to get triggered in this line: > > > > > > > > > > > > rose_call = (ax25_address *)neigh->dev->dev_addr; > > > > > > > > > > > > Prevent it by checking NULL condition for neigh->dev before comparing addressed for > > > > > > rose_call initialization. > > > > > > > > > > > > Reported-by: syzbot+a1c743815982d9496393@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > > > > > > Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=9d2a7ca8c7f2e4b682c97578dfa3f236258300b3 > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anmol Karn > > > > > > --- > > > > > > I am bit sceptical about the error return code, please suggest if anything else is > > > > > > appropriate in place of '-ENODEV'. > > > > > > > > > > > > net/rose/rose_link.c | 3 +++ > > > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/net/rose/rose_link.c b/net/rose/rose_link.c > > > > > > index f6102e6f5161..92ea6a31d575 100644 > > > > > > --- a/net/rose/rose_link.c > > > > > > +++ b/net/rose/rose_link.c > > > > > > @@ -97,6 +97,9 @@ static int rose_send_frame(struct sk_buff *skb, struct rose_neigh *neigh) > > > > > > ax25_address *rose_call; > > > > > > ax25_cb *ax25s; > > > > > > > > > > > > + if (!neigh->dev) > > > > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > > > > > > > > How can ->dev not be set at this point in time? Shouldn't that be > > > > > fixed, because it could change right after you check this, right? > > > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > > > > > Hello Sir, > > > > > > > > Thanks for the review, > > > > After following the call trace i thought, if neigh->dev is NULL it should > > > > be checked, but I will figure out what is going on with the crash reproducer, > > > > and I think rose_loopback_timer() is the place where problem started. > > > > > > > > Also, I have created a diff for checking neigh->dev before assigning ROSE callsign > > > > , please give your suggestions on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/net/rose/rose_link.c b/net/rose/rose_link.c > > > > index f6102e6f5161..2ddd5e559442 100644 > > > > --- a/net/rose/rose_link.c > > > > +++ b/net/rose/rose_link.c > > > > @@ -97,10 +97,14 @@ static int rose_send_frame(struct sk_buff *skb, struct rose_neigh *neigh) > > > > ax25_address *rose_call; > > > > ax25_cb *ax25s; > > > > > > > > - if (ax25cmp(&rose_callsign, &null_ax25_address) == 0) > > > > - rose_call = (ax25_address *)neigh->dev->dev_addr; > > > > - else > > > > - rose_call = &rose_callsign; > > > > + if (neigh->dev) { > > > > + if (ax25cmp(&rose_callsign, &null_ax25_address) == 0) > > > > + rose_call = (ax25_address *)neigh->dev->dev_addr; > > > > + else > > > > + rose_call = &rose_callsign; > > > > + } else { > > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > > + } > > > > > > The point I am trying to make is that if someone else is setting ->dev > > > to NULL in some other thread/context/whatever, while this is running, > > > checking for it like this will not work. > > > > > > What is the lifetime rules of that pointer? Who initializes it, and who > > > sets it to NULL. Figure that out first please to determine how to check > > > for this properly. > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > Hello All, > > > > I investigated further on this, > > > > Here is some things i noticed: > > > > When I followed the call trace, > > > > [ 84.241331][ C3] Call Trace: > > [ 84.241331][ C3] rose_transmit_clear_request ($SOURCE/net/rose/rose_link.c:255) > > [ 84.241331][ C3] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on ($SOURCE/kernel/locking/lockdep.c:4161) > > [ 84.241331][ C3] rose_rx_call_request ($SOURCE/net/rose/af_rose.c:999) > > [ 84.241331][ C3] ? rose_release ($SOURCE/net/rose/af_rose.c:970) > > [ 84.241331][ C3] rose_loopback_timer ($SOURCE/net/rose/rose_loopback.c:100) > > [ 84.241331][ C3] ? rose_transmit_link ($SOURCE/net/rose/rose_loopback.c:60) > > > > in the rose_send_frame() it dereferenced `neigh->dev` when called from > > rose_transmit_clear_request(), and the first occurance of the `neigh` > > is in rose_loopback_timer() as `rose_loopback_neigh`, and it is initialized > > in rose_add_loopback_neighh() as NULL. > > > > - net/rose/rose_route.c:381 > > > > void rose_add_loopback_neigh(void) > > { > > struct rose_neigh *sn; > > > > rose_loopback_neigh = kmalloc(sizeof(struct rose_neigh), GFP_KERNEL); > > if (!rose_loopback_neigh) > > return; > > sn = rose_loopback_neigh; > > > > sn->callsign = null_ax25_address; > > sn->digipeat = NULL; > > sn->ax25 = NULL; > > sn->dev = NULL; > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > i.e when `rose_loopback_neigh` used in rose_loopback_timer() its `->dev` was > > still NULL and rose_loopback_timer() was calling rose_rx_call_request() > > without checking for NULL. > > > > > > I have created the following patch to check for NULL pointer. > > > > diff --git a/net/rose/rose_loopback.c b/net/rose/rose_loopback.c > > index 7b094275ea8b..cd7774cb1d07 100644 > > --- a/net/rose/rose_loopback.c > > +++ b/net/rose/rose_loopback.c > > @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ static void rose_loopback_timer(struct timer_list *unused) > > } > > > > if (frametype == ROSE_CALL_REQUEST) { > > - if ((dev = rose_dev_get(dest)) != NULL) { > > + if (rose_loopback_neigh->dev && (dev = rose_dev_get(dest)) != NULL) { > > if (rose_rx_call_request(skb, dev, rose_loopback_neigh, lci_o) == 0) > > kfree_skb(skb); > > } else { > > > > > > > > Please, review it and give me suggestions whether i am going right or not. > > That seems better, does it solve the syzbot test? > > thanks, > > greg k-h Hello Sir, yes this patch is tested by syzbot. Below links triggers same bug: Link 1: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=f46c94afb217ab49c75350adbd467d86ae2b59a6 Link 2: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=9d2a7ca8c7f2e4b682c97578dfa3f236258300b3 Also, can i now send a version 2 of this patch? Thanks, Anmol