On Fri, Feb 7, 2025 at 8:13 AM Lizhi Xu <lizhi.xu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> syzbot reported a null ptr deref in clone_private_mount. [1]
>
> The mnt_ns member should be accessed after confirming that it has been mounted.
>
> [1]
> KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000048-0x000000000000004f]
> CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 5834 Comm: syz-executor772 Not tainted 6.14.0-rc1-next-20250206-syzkaller #0
> Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 12/27/2024
> RIP: 0010:is_anon_ns fs/mount.h:159 [inline]
> RIP: 0010:clone_private_mount+0x184/0x3e0 fs/namespace.c:2425
The splat beyond this point is mainly noise I think and referencing [1] is also
a bit weird in the context of this short message
> Reported-by: syzbot+62dfea789a2cedac1298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Missing:
Fixes: ae63304102ecd ("fs: allow detached mounts in clone_private_mount()")
> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=62dfea789a2cedac1298
> Signed-off-by: Lizhi Xu <lizhi.xu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/namespace.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/namespace.c b/fs/namespace.c
> index 1314f11ed961..8e2ff3dbab58 100644
> --- a/fs/namespace.c
> +++ b/fs/namespace.c
> @@ -2421,6 +2421,9 @@ struct vfsmount *clone_private_mount(const struct path *path)
> if (!check_mnt(old_mnt))
> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> } else {
> + if (!is_mounted(&old_mnt->mnt))
> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +
> /* Make sure this isn't something purely kernel internal. */
> if (!is_anon_ns(old_mnt->mnt_ns))
> return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
Do we still need the second check if we have the first one?
Thanks,
Amir.
