On 2019/7/25 0:07, Eric Biggers wrote:
[+Cc linux-crypto] On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 06:02:04PM +0800, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:In derive_key_aes(), tfm is assigned to NULL on line 46, and then crypto_free_skcipher(tfm) is executed. crypto_free_skcipher(tfm) crypto_skcipher_tfm(tfm) return &tfm->base; Thus, a possible null-pointer dereference may occur.This analysis is incorrect because only the address &tfm->base is taken. There's no pointer dereference. In fact all the crypto_free_*() functions are no-ops on NULL pointers, and many other callers rely on it. So there's no bug here.
Thanks for the reply :)I admit that "&tfm->base" is not a null-pointer dereference when tfm is NULL. But I still think crypto_free_skcipher(tfm) can cause security problems when tfm is NULL.
Looking at the code: static inline void crypto_free_skcipher(struct crypto_skcipher *tfm) { crypto_destroy_tfm(tfm, crypto_skcipher_tfm(tfm)); } static inline struct crypto_tfm *crypto_skcipher_tfm( struct crypto_skcipher *tfm) { return &tfm->base; } void crypto_destroy_tfm(void *mem, struct crypto_tfm *tfm) { struct crypto_alg *alg; if (unlikely(!mem)) return; alg = tfm->__crt_alg; if (!tfm->exit && alg->cra_exit) alg->cra_exit(tfm); crypto_exit_ops(tfm); crypto_mod_put(alg); kzfree(mem); }The function crypto_skcipher_tfm() may return an uninitialized address (&tfm->base) when tfm is NULL. Then crypto_destroy_tfm() uses this problematic address (tfm), which may cause security problems.
Besides, I also find that some kernel modules check tfm before calling crypto_free_*(), such as:
drivers/crypto/vmx/aes_xts.c: if (ctx->fallback) { crypto_free_skcipher(ctx->fallback); ctx->fallback = NULL; } net/rxrpc/rxkad.c: if (conn->cipher) crypto_free_skcipher(conn->cipher); drivers/crypto/chelsio/chcr_algo.c: if (ablkctx->aes_generic) crypto_free_cipher(ablkctx->aes_generic); net/mac80211/wep.c: if (!IS_ERR(local->wep_tx_tfm)) crypto_free_cipher(local->wep_tx_tfm); Thus, I think it is better to check tfm before calling crypto_free_*().
It appears you've sent the same patch for some of these other callers (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/?q=%22fix+a+possible+null-pointer%22), but none are Cc'ed to linux-crypto or another mailing list I'm subscribed to, so I can't respond to them. But this feedback applies equally to them too.
Ah, sorry.I just ran "get_maintainer.pl" for the kernel modules used crypto_free_*(), and forgot to cc to linux-crypto...
Note also that if there actually were a bug here (which again, there doesn't appear to be), we'd need to fix it in crypto_free_*(), not in the callers.
I think a possible way is to add a check of tfm in crypto_free_*(), such as: static inline void crypto_free_skcipher(struct crypto_skcipher *tfm) { if (tfm) crypto_destroy_tfm(tfm, crypto_skcipher_tfm(tfm)); } If you think it is okay, I can send a patch for this. Best wishes, Jia-Ju Bai