On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 11:11:57PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 10:59:17PM +0200, Andrew Kanner wrote:
> > KMSAN reports the following issue:
> > [ 81.822503] =====================================================
> > [ 81.823222] BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in selinux_inet_conn_request+0x2c8/0x4b0
> > [ 81.823891] selinux_inet_conn_request+0x2c8/0x4b0
> > [ 81.824385] security_inet_conn_request+0xc0/0x160
> > [ 81.824886] tcp_v4_route_req+0x30e/0x490
> > [ 81.825343] tcp_conn_request+0xdc8/0x3400
> > [ 81.825813] tcp_v4_conn_request+0x134/0x190
> > [ 81.826292] tcp_rcv_state_process+0x1f4/0x3b40
> > [ 81.826797] tcp_v4_do_rcv+0x9ca/0xc30
> > [ 81.827236] tcp_v4_rcv+0x3bf5/0x4180
> > [ 81.827670] ip_protocol_deliver_rcu+0x822/0x1230
> > [ 81.828174] ip_local_deliver_finish+0x259/0x370
> > [ 81.828667] ip_local_deliver+0x1c0/0x450
> > [ 81.829105] ip_sublist_rcv+0xdc1/0xf50
> > [ 81.829534] ip_list_rcv+0x72e/0x790
> > [ 81.829941] __netif_receive_skb_list_core+0x10d5/0x1180
> > [ 81.830499] netif_receive_skb_list_internal+0xc41/0x1190
> > [ 81.831064] napi_complete_done+0x2c4/0x8b0
> > [ 81.831532] e1000_clean+0x12bf/0x4d90
> > [ 81.831983] __napi_poll+0xa6/0x760
> > [ 81.832391] net_rx_action+0x84c/0x1550
> > [ 81.832831] __do_softirq+0x272/0xa6c
> > [ 81.833239] __irq_exit_rcu+0xb7/0x1a0
> > [ 81.833654] irq_exit_rcu+0x17/0x40
> > [ 81.834044] common_interrupt+0x8d/0xa0
> > [ 81.834494] asm_common_interrupt+0x2b/0x40
> > [ 81.834949] default_idle+0x17/0x20
> > [ 81.835356] arch_cpu_idle+0xd/0x20
> > [ 81.835766] default_idle_call+0x43/0x70
> > [ 81.836210] do_idle+0x258/0x800
> > [ 81.836581] cpu_startup_entry+0x26/0x30
> > [ 81.837002] __pfx_ap_starting+0x0/0x10
> > [ 81.837444] secondary_startup_64_no_verify+0x17a/0x17b
> > [ 81.837979]
> > [ 81.838166] Local variable nlbl_type.i created at:
> > [ 81.838596] selinux_inet_conn_request+0xe3/0x4b0
> > [ 81.839078] security_inet_conn_request+0xc0/0x160
> >
> > KMSAN warning is reproducible with:
> > * netlabel_mgmt_protocount is 0 (e.g. netlbl_enabled() returns 0)
> > * CONFIG_SECURITY_NETWORK_XFRM may be set or not
> > * CONFIG_KMSAN=y
> > * `ssh USER@HOSTNAME /bin/date`
> >
> > selinux_skb_peerlbl_sid() will call selinux_xfrm_skb_sid(), then fall
> > to selinux_netlbl_skbuff_getsid() which will not initialize nlbl_type,
> > but it will be passed to:
> >
> > err = security_net_peersid_resolve(nlbl_sid,
> > nlbl_type, xfrm_sid, sid);
> >
> > and checked by KMSAN, although it will not be used inside
> > security_net_peersid_resolve() (at least now), since this function
> > will check either (xfrm_sid == SECSID_NULL) or (nlbl_sid ==
> > SECSID_NULL) first and return before using uninitialized nlbl_type.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Kanner <andrew.kanner@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > security/selinux/netlabel.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> What git commit id does this fix? Does it also need to go to older
> kernels? If so, how far back?
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Thanks, Greg. I mentioned it in the cover letter only because I'm not
sure, it seems to be:
Fixes: 220deb966ea5 ("SELinux: Better integration between peer labeling subsystems")
which is ~v2.6.24, I believe. I wish I could use KMSAN there -)
But I checked - this uninit var will not be used on 220deb966ea5 and
the function will return earlier as well. As far as I see this is just
a KMSAN warning for the uninitialized function argument.
PS: maybe we should check if KMSAN is be able to check the possible
usage of such uninit arguments.
--
Andrew Kanner
