On Sat, Aug 17, 2024 at 10:48:15AM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hi Yafang,
>
> On Sat, Aug 17, 2024 at 10:56:21AM GMT, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > In kstrdup(), it is critical to ensure that the dest string is always
> > NUL-terminated. However, potential race condidtion can occur between a
> > writer and a reader.
> >
> > Consider the following scenario involving task->comm:
> >
> > reader writer
> >
> > len = strlen(s) + 1;
> > strlcpy(tsk->comm, buf, sizeof(tsk->comm));
> > memcpy(buf, s, len);
> >
> > In this case, there is a race condition between the reader and the
> > writer. The reader calculate the length of the string `s` based on the
> > old value of task->comm. However, during the memcpy(), the string `s`
> > might be updated by the writer to a new value of task->comm.
> >
> > If the new task->comm is larger than the old one, the `buf` might not be
> > NUL-terminated. This can lead to undefined behavior and potential
> > security vulnerabilities.
> >
> > Let's fix it by explicitly adding a NUL-terminator.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > mm/util.c | 8 +++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/util.c b/mm/util.c
> > index 983baf2bd675..4542d8a800d9 100644
> > --- a/mm/util.c
> > +++ b/mm/util.c
> > @@ -62,8 +62,14 @@ char *kstrdup(const char *s, gfp_t gfp)
> >
> > len = strlen(s) + 1;
> > buf = kmalloc_track_caller(len, gfp);
> > - if (buf)
> > + if (buf) {
> > memcpy(buf, s, len);
> > + /* During memcpy(), the string might be updated to a new value,
> > + * which could be longer than the string when strlen() is
> > + * called. Therefore, we need to add a null termimator.
> > + */
> > + buf[len - 1] = '\0';
> > + }
>
> I would compact the above to:
>
> len = strlen(s);
> buf = kmalloc_track_caller(len + 1, gfp);
> if (buf)
> strcpy(mempcpy(buf, s, len), "");
>
> It allows _FORTIFY_SOURCE to track the copy of the NUL, and also uses
> less screen. It also has less moving parts. (You'd need to write a
> mempcpy() for the kernel, but that's as easy as the following:)
>
> #define mempcpy(d, s, n) (memcpy(d, s, n) + n)
>
> In shadow utils, I did a global replacement of all buf[...] = '\0'; by
> strcpy(..., "");. It ends up being optimized by the compiler to the
> same code (at least in the experiments I did).
Just to repeat what's already been said: no, please, don't complicate
this with yet more wrappers. And I really don't want to add more str/mem
variants -- we're working really hard to _remove_ them. :P
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
