On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 11:14:55AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29 2019, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 10:02:37AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 29 2019, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 06:33:01PM -0400, Dave Wysochanski wrote:
> >> >> The sunrpc cache interface is susceptible to being fooled by a rogue
> >> >> process just reading a 'channel' file. If this happens the kernel
> >> >> may think a valid daemon exists to service the cache when it does not.
> >> >> For example, the following may fool the kernel:
> >> >> cat /proc/net/rpc/auth.unix.gid/channel
> >> >>
> >> >> Change the tracking of readers to writers when considering whether a
> >> >> listener exists as all valid daemon processes either open a channel
> >> >> file O_RDWR or O_WRONLY. While this does not prevent a rogue process
> >> >> from "stealing" a message from the kernel, it does at least improve
> >> >> the kernels perception of whether a valid process servicing the cache
> >> >> exists.
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Dave Wysochanski <dwysocha@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> ---
> >> >> include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h | 6 +++---
> >> >> net/sunrpc/cache.c | 12 ++++++++----
> >> >> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h b/include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h
> >> >> index c7f38e8..f7d086b 100644
> >> >> --- a/include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h
> >> >> +++ b/include/linux/sunrpc/cache.h
> >> >> @@ -107,9 +107,9 @@ struct cache_detail {
> >> >> /* fields for communication over channel */
> >> >> struct list_head queue;
> >> >>
> >> >> - atomic_t readers; /* how many time is /chennel open */
> >> >> - time_t last_close; /* if no readers, when did last close */
> >> >> - time_t last_warn; /* when we last warned about no readers */
> >> >> + atomic_t writers; /* how many time is /channel open */
> >> >> + time_t last_close; /* if no writers, when did last close */
> >> >> + time_t last_warn; /* when we last warned about no writers */
> >> >>
> >> >> union {
> >> >> struct proc_dir_entry *procfs;
> >> >> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/cache.c b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> >> >> index 6f1528f..a6a6190 100644
> >> >> --- a/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> >> >> +++ b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> >> >> @@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ void sunrpc_init_cache_detail(struct cache_detail *cd)
> >> >> spin_lock(&cache_list_lock);
> >> >> cd->nextcheck = 0;
> >> >> cd->entries = 0;
> >> >> - atomic_set(&cd->readers, 0);
> >> >> + atomic_set(&cd->writers, 0);
> >> >> cd->last_close = 0;
> >> >> cd->last_warn = -1;
> >> >> list_add(&cd->others, &cache_list);
> >> >> @@ -1029,11 +1029,13 @@ static int cache_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp,
> >> >> }
> >> >> rp->offset = 0;
> >> >> rp->q.reader = 1;
> >> >> - atomic_inc(&cd->readers);
> >> >> +
> >> >> spin_lock(&queue_lock);
> >> >> list_add(&rp->q.list, &cd->queue);
> >> >> spin_unlock(&queue_lock);
> >> >> }
> >> >> + if (filp->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE)
> >> >> + atomic_inc(&cd->writers);
> >> >
> >> > This patch would be even simpler if we just modified the condition of
> >> > the preceding if clause:
> >> >
> >> > - if (filp->f_mode & FMODE_READ) {
> >> > + if (filp->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE) {
> >> >
> >> > and then we could drop the following chunk completely.
> >> >
> >> > Is there any reason not to do that?
> >>
> >> I can see how this would be tempting, but I think the reason not to do
> >> that is it is ... wrong.
> >>
> >> The bulk of the code is for setting up context to support reading, so it
> >> really should be conditional on FMODE_READ.
> >> We always want to set that up, because if a process opens for read, and
> >> not write, we want to respond properly to read requests. This is useful
> >> for debugging.
> >
> > How is it useful for debugging?
>
> I often ask for
>
> grep . /proc/net/rpc/*/*
>
> If nothing is reported for "channel", then I know that the problem isn't
> that mountd is dead or stuck or similar.
Eh, OK. Anyway I've got no actual serious complaint.
Applying with the reviewed-by:.
--b.
