* Re: CVE-2024-41001: io_uring/sqpoll: work around a potential audit memory leak
[not found] <2024071253-CVE-2024-41001-7879@gregkh>
@ 2024-07-17 11:49 ` Wang Zhaolong
2024-07-18 14:41 ` Wang Zhaolong
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Wang Zhaolong @ 2024-07-17 11:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cve, linux-kernel, linux-cve-announce, axboe; +Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, io-uring
Hello,
I was confused when reviewing the fix for CVE-2024-41001.
To better understand the issue and the proposed solution, I would
greatly appreciate your help in clarifying the following points:
1. What was the original patch that introduced this issue (any Fixes tag)?
2. Is the leaking variable member the "context->sockaddr"?
3. Could you shed some light on how the reference to the leaked memory is
lost during the transition from the prep phase to the issue phase?
4. The fix introduces a NOP operation "before the SQPOLL does anything."
How does this addition of a NOP operation prevent the memory leak from
occurring?
Thank you in advance for taking the time to address my questions. Your
insights will help me better understand this fix.
Best regards,
Wang Zhaolong
> Description
> ===========
>
> In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
>
> io_uring/sqpoll: work around a potential audit memory leak
>
> kmemleak complains that there's a memory leak related to connect
> handling:
>
> unreferenced object 0xffff0001093bdf00 (size 128):
> comm "iou-sqp-455", pid 457, jiffies 4294894164
> hex dump (first 32 bytes):
> 02 00 fa ea 7f 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
> backtrace (crc 2e481b1a):
> [<00000000c0a26af4>] kmemleak_alloc+0x30/0x38
> [<000000009c30bb45>] kmalloc_trace+0x228/0x358
> [<000000009da9d39f>] __audit_sockaddr+0xd0/0x138
> [<0000000089a93e34>] move_addr_to_kernel+0x1a0/0x1f8
> [<000000000b4e80e6>] io_connect_prep+0x1ec/0x2d4
> [<00000000abfbcd99>] io_submit_sqes+0x588/0x1e48
> [<00000000e7c25e07>] io_sq_thread+0x8a4/0x10e4
> [<00000000d999b491>] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
>
> which can can happen if:
>
> 1) The command type does something on the prep side that triggers an
> audit call.
> 2) The thread hasn't done any operations before this that triggered
> an audit call inside ->issue(), where we have audit_uring_entry()
> and audit_uring_exit().
>
> Work around this by issuing a blanket NOP operation before the SQPOLL
> does anything.
>
> The Linux kernel CVE team has assigned CVE-2024-41001 to this issue.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: CVE-2024-41001: io_uring/sqpoll: work around a potential audit memory leak
2024-07-17 11:49 ` CVE-2024-41001: io_uring/sqpoll: work around a potential audit memory leak Wang Zhaolong
@ 2024-07-18 14:41 ` Wang Zhaolong
2024-07-19 19:03 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Wang Zhaolong @ 2024-07-18 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cve, linux-kernel, linux-cve-announce, axboe; +Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, io-uring
Hello,
I think a possible reason for the leak scenario is:
When `audit_context->dummy` is 0. __audit_sockaddr() allocates sockaddr.
In the below process, audit_reset_context() return early. ctx->sockaddr
is not released.
io_issue_sqe
audit_uring_entry
__audit_uring_entry
ctx->dummy -- set dummy as non-zero
def->issue()
audit_uring_exit
__audit_uring_exit
audit_reset_context
static void audit_reset_context(struct audit_context *ctx)
{
......
/* if ctx is non-null, reset the "ctx->context" regardless */
ctx->context = AUDIT_CTX_UNUSED;
if (ctx->dummy)
return;
......
kfree(ctx->sockaddr);
......
}
The `audit_uring_entry(IORING_OP_NOP);` statement initializes the 'dummy' once at the
beginning to ensure that ctx->sockaddr is allocated and deallocated in pairs later
in the process.
According to the above analysis, I think the fixes tag should be
5bd2182d58e9 ("audit,io_uring,io-wq: add some basic audit support to io_uring")
Is my understanding correct?
I look forward to hearing back.
Best regards,
Wang Zhaolong
> Hello,
>
> I was confused when reviewing the fix for CVE-2024-41001.
> To better understand the issue and the proposed solution, I would
> greatly appreciate your help in clarifying the following points:
>
> 1. What was the original patch that introduced this issue (any Fixes tag)?
> 2. Is the leaking variable member the "context->sockaddr"?
> 3. Could you shed some light on how the reference to the leaked memory is
> lost during the transition from the prep phase to the issue phase?
> 4. The fix introduces a NOP operation "before the SQPOLL does anything."
> How does this addition of a NOP operation prevent the memory leak from
> occurring?
>
> Thank you in advance for taking the time to address my questions. Your
> insights will help me better understand this fix.
>
> Best regards,
> Wang Zhaolong
>
>> Description
>> ===========
>>
>> In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
>>
>> io_uring/sqpoll: work around a potential audit memory leak
>>
>> kmemleak complains that there's a memory leak related to connect
>> handling:
>>
>> unreferenced object 0xffff0001093bdf00 (size 128):
>> comm "iou-sqp-455", pid 457, jiffies 4294894164
>> hex dump (first 32 bytes):
>> 02 00 fa ea 7f 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
>> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
>> backtrace (crc 2e481b1a):
>> [<00000000c0a26af4>] kmemleak_alloc+0x30/0x38
>> [<000000009c30bb45>] kmalloc_trace+0x228/0x358
>> [<000000009da9d39f>] __audit_sockaddr+0xd0/0x138
>> [<0000000089a93e34>] move_addr_to_kernel+0x1a0/0x1f8
>> [<000000000b4e80e6>] io_connect_prep+0x1ec/0x2d4
>> [<00000000abfbcd99>] io_submit_sqes+0x588/0x1e48
>> [<00000000e7c25e07>] io_sq_thread+0x8a4/0x10e4
>> [<00000000d999b491>] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
>>
>> which can can happen if:
>>
>> 1) The command type does something on the prep side that triggers an
>> audit call.
>> 2) The thread hasn't done any operations before this that triggered
>> an audit call inside ->issue(), where we have audit_uring_entry()
>> and audit_uring_exit().
>>
>> Work around this by issuing a blanket NOP operation before the SQPOLL
>> does anything.
>>
>> The Linux kernel CVE team has assigned CVE-2024-41001 to this issue.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: CVE-2024-41001: io_uring/sqpoll: work around a potential audit memory leak
2024-07-18 14:41 ` Wang Zhaolong
@ 2024-07-19 19:03 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2024-07-19 19:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wang Zhaolong, cve, linux-kernel, linux-cve-announce
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, io-uring
On 7/18/24 8:41 AM, Wang Zhaolong wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I think a possible reason for the leak scenario is:
>
> When `audit_context->dummy` is 0. __audit_sockaddr() allocates sockaddr.
>
> In the below process, audit_reset_context() return early. ctx->sockaddr
> is not released.
>
> io_issue_sqe
> audit_uring_entry
> __audit_uring_entry
> ctx->dummy -- set dummy as non-zero
> def->issue()
> audit_uring_exit
> __audit_uring_exit
> audit_reset_context
>
> static void audit_reset_context(struct audit_context *ctx)
> {
> ......
> /* if ctx is non-null, reset the "ctx->context" regardless */
> ctx->context = AUDIT_CTX_UNUSED;
> if (ctx->dummy)
> return;
>
> ......
> kfree(ctx->sockaddr);
> ......
> }
>
> The `audit_uring_entry(IORING_OP_NOP);` statement initializes the 'dummy' once at the
> beginning to ensure that ctx->sockaddr is allocated and deallocated in pairs later
> in the process.
>
> According to the above analysis, I think the fixes tag should be
> 5bd2182d58e9 ("audit,io_uring,io-wq: add some basic audit support to io_uring")
It was introduced with the changes to the above commit, where you could
end up calling prep (which does the move_addr_to_kernel()) before audit
was ready for it. This is the call trace shown in the commit as well.
Which I _think_ is:
Fixes: f482aa986527 ("audit, io_uring, io-wq: Fix memory leak in io_sq_thread() and io_wqe_worker()")
but I'd have to double check. In any case, it's a leak on the audit
side.
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-07-19 19:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <2024071253-CVE-2024-41001-7879@gregkh>
2024-07-17 11:49 ` CVE-2024-41001: io_uring/sqpoll: work around a potential audit memory leak Wang Zhaolong
2024-07-18 14:41 ` Wang Zhaolong
2024-07-19 19:03 ` Jens Axboe
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox