Re: [RFC PATCH] NFSv4: fix rpc_task use-after-free when open concurrently

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





在 2024/11/9 6:21, Trond Myklebust 写道:
On Tue, 2024-10-22 at 20:21 +0800, Yang Erkun wrote:
From: Yang Erkun <yangerkun@xxxxxxxxxx>

Two threads that work with the same cred try to open different files
concurrently, they will utilize the same nfs4_state_owner. And in
order
to sequential open request send to server, the second task will fall
into RPC_TASK_QUEUED in nfs_wait_on_sequence since there is already
one
work doing the open operation. Furthermore, the second task will wait
until the first task completes its work, call rpc_wake_up_queued_task
in
nfs_release_seqid to wake up the second task, allowing it to complete
the remaining open operation.

The preceding logic does not cause any problems under normal
circumstances. However, when once we force an unmount using `umount -
f`,
the function nfs_umount_begin attempts to kill all tasks by calling
rpc_signal_task. This help wake up the second task, but it sets the
status to -ERESTARTSYS. This status prevents `nfs4_open_release` from
calling `nfs4_opendata_to_nfs4_state`. Consequently, while the second
task will be freed, the original tasks will still exist in
sequence->list(see nfs_release_seqid). Latter, when the first thread
calls nfs_release_seqid and attempts to wake up the second task, it
will
trigger the uaf.

To resolve this issue, ensure rpc_task will remove it from
sequence->list in nfs4_open_release when open failed, besides, we can
only wakeup the next rpc_task, or use-after-free will happen too
since
privious rpc_task may be released too.

==================================================================
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in rpc_wake_up_queued_task+0xbb/0xc0
Read of size 8 at addr ff11000007639930 by task bash/792

CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 792 Comm: bash Tainted: G    B   W
6.11.0-09960-gd10b58fe53dc-dirty #10
Tainted: [B]=BAD_PAGE, [W]=WARN
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS
1.16.1-2.fc37 04/01/2014
Call Trace:
  <TASK>
  dump_stack_lvl+0xa3/0x120
  print_address_description.constprop.0+0x63/0x510
  print_report+0xf5/0x360
  kasan_report+0xd9/0x140
  __asan_report_load8_noabort+0x24/0x40
  rpc_wake_up_queued_task+0xbb/0xc0
  nfs_release_seqid+0x1e1/0x2f0
  nfs_free_seqid+0x1a/0x40
  nfs4_opendata_free+0xc6/0x3e0
  _nfs4_do_open.isra.0+0xbe3/0x1380
  nfs4_do_open+0x28b/0x620
  nfs4_atomic_open+0x2c6/0x3a0
  nfs_atomic_open+0x4f8/0x1180
  atomic_open+0x186/0x4e0
  lookup_open.isra.0+0x3e7/0x15b0
  open_last_lookups+0x85d/0x1260
  path_openat+0x151/0x7b0
  do_filp_open+0x1e0/0x310
  do_sys_openat2+0x178/0x1f0
  do_sys_open+0xa2/0x100
  __x64_sys_openat+0xa8/0x120
  x64_sys_call+0x2507/0x4540
  do_syscall_64+0xa7/0x240
  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e

...

Allocated by task 767:
  kasan_save_stack+0x3b/0x70
  kasan_save_track+0x1c/0x40
  kasan_save_alloc_info+0x44/0x70
  __kasan_slab_alloc+0xaf/0xc0
  kmem_cache_alloc_noprof+0x1e0/0x4f0
  rpc_new_task+0xe7/0x220
  rpc_run_task+0x27/0x7d0
  nfs4_run_open_task+0x477/0x810
  _nfs4_proc_open+0xc0/0x6d0
  _nfs4_open_and_get_state+0x178/0xc50
  _nfs4_do_open.isra.0+0x47f/0x1380
  nfs4_do_open+0x28b/0x620
  nfs4_atomic_open+0x2c6/0x3a0
  nfs_atomic_open+0x4f8/0x1180
  atomic_open+0x186/0x4e0
  lookup_open.isra.0+0x3e7/0x15b0
  open_last_lookups+0x85d/0x1260
  path_openat+0x151/0x7b0
  do_filp_open+0x1e0/0x310
  do_sys_openat2+0x178/0x1f0
  do_sys_open+0xa2/0x100
  __x64_sys_openat+0xa8/0x120
  x64_sys_call+0x2507/0x4540
  do_syscall_64+0xa7/0x240
  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e

Freed by task 767:
  kasan_save_stack+0x3b/0x70
  kasan_save_track+0x1c/0x40
  kasan_save_free_info+0x43/0x80
  __kasan_slab_free+0x4f/0x90
  kmem_cache_free+0x199/0x4f0
  mempool_free_slab+0x1f/0x30
  mempool_free+0xdf/0x3d0
  rpc_free_task+0x12d/0x180
  rpc_final_put_task+0x10e/0x150
  rpc_do_put_task+0x63/0x80
  rpc_put_task+0x18/0x30
  nfs4_run_open_task+0x4f4/0x810
  _nfs4_proc_open+0xc0/0x6d0
  _nfs4_open_and_get_state+0x178/0xc50
  _nfs4_do_open.isra.0+0x47f/0x1380
  nfs4_do_open+0x28b/0x620
  nfs4_atomic_open+0x2c6/0x3a0
  nfs_atomic_open+0x4f8/0x1180
  atomic_open+0x186/0x4e0
  lookup_open.isra.0+0x3e7/0x15b0
  open_last_lookups+0x85d/0x1260
  path_openat+0x151/0x7b0
  do_filp_open+0x1e0/0x310
  do_sys_openat2+0x178/0x1f0
  do_sys_open+0xa2/0x100
  __x64_sys_openat+0xa8/0x120
  x64_sys_call+0x2507/0x4540
  do_syscall_64+0xa7/0x240
  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e

Fixes: 24ac23ab88df ("NFSv4: Convert open() into an asynchronous RPC
call")
Signed-off-by: Yang Erkun <yangerkun@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
  fs/nfs/nfs4_fs.h   |  1 +
  fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c  |  2 ++
  fs/nfs/nfs4state.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
  3 files changed, 21 insertions(+)

diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4_fs.h b/fs/nfs/nfs4_fs.h
index 7d383d29a995..3bbd945a78ca 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/nfs4_fs.h
+++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4_fs.h
@@ -525,6 +525,7 @@ extern struct nfs_seqid *nfs_alloc_seqid(struct
nfs_seqid_counter *counter, gfp_
  extern int nfs_wait_on_sequence(struct nfs_seqid *seqid, struct
rpc_task *task);
  extern void nfs_increment_open_seqid(int status, struct nfs_seqid
*seqid);
  extern void nfs_increment_lock_seqid(int status, struct nfs_seqid
*seqid);
+extern void nfs_release_seqid_inorder(struct nfs_seqid *seqid);
  extern void nfs_release_seqid(struct nfs_seqid *seqid);
  extern void nfs_free_seqid(struct nfs_seqid *seqid);
  extern int nfs4_setup_sequence(struct nfs_client *client,
diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
index cd2fbde2e6d7..86e093ffb39c 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
@@ -2438,6 +2438,8 @@ static void nfs4_open_confirm_release(void
*calldata)
  	struct nfs4_opendata *data = calldata;
  	struct nfs4_state *state = NULL;
+ if (data->rpc_status != 0 || !data->rpc_done)
+		nfs_release_seqid_inorder(data->o_arg.seqid);
  	/* If this request hasn't been cancelled, do nothing */
  	if (!data->cancelled)
  		goto out_free;
diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c
index dafd61186557..df5e7a0b6528 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c
@@ -1075,6 +1075,24 @@ struct nfs_seqid *nfs_alloc_seqid(struct
nfs_seqid_counter *counter, gfp_t gfp_m
  	return new;
  }
+void nfs_release_seqid_inorder(struct nfs_seqid *seqid)
+{
+	struct nfs_seqid_counter *sequence;
+
+	if (seqid == NULL || list_empty(&seqid->list))
+		return;
+	sequence = seqid->sequence;
+	spin_lock(&sequence->lock);
+	if (!list_is_last(&seqid->list, &sequence->list)) {
+		struct nfs_seqid *next;
+
+		next = list_next_entry(seqid, list);
+		rpc_wake_up_queued_task(&sequence->wait, next-
task);
+	}
+	list_del_init(&seqid->list);
+	spin_unlock(&sequence->lock);
+}
+
  void nfs_release_seqid(struct nfs_seqid *seqid)
  {
  	struct nfs_seqid_counter *sequence;


I'm not really seeing why we need a new function
nfs_release_seqid_inorder(). Yes, there is an optimisation that can be
made for nfs_release_seqid(), but that's not relevant to the problem
you are seeing.

Hi, you can see the second uaf analysis with this link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ae13ac55-a90f-6cfd-f23b-2ae5999d2f8c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

And for why I do this, the reply from me for this patch. It's a rfc to talk does we should change nfs_release_seqid all to do this order wakeup.

"
Hi,

For this patch, no failed test case is added to the local nfsv4.0
nfsv4.1 test suite. But I'm not sure whether to change nfs_release_seqid
to wake-up in sequence, so I changed the patch title to rfc. Hope we can
discuss it together.

Thanks,
Erkun.
"



The other issue is that you're applying the fix to
nfs4_open_confirm_release(), which doesn't need fixing. The only

Oh, sorry, this is some mistake when I write this rfc.

function that needs to change is nfs4_open_release(), because it is the
only one that can be called without nfs_wait_on_sequence() having
succeeded, and so is the only function that can destroy the rpc_task
before the seqid has become the first entry in the sequence->list.

I've sent a couple of patches that address both the optimisation and a
proposed final fix for the problem to the list (with you on the Cc
list). Please check if they fix your problem.

Yeah, your patchset pass my testcase.


Thanks!






[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Media Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Info]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux