Re: [PATCH v5] wifi: brcmfmac: Fix use-after-free bug in brcmf_cfg80211_detach

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

 



Yes, that makes this issue hard to fix. I was wondering why it binds the
worker with the timer rather than using just one of them.

Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> 于2023年11月17日周五 02:25写道:
>
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2023 19:20:06 +0100,
> Arend Van Spriel wrote:
> >
> > On November 15, 2023 4:00:46 PM Zheng Hacker <hackerzheng666@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 于2023年11月13日周一 17:18写道:
> > >>
> > >> On November 8, 2023 4:03:26 AM Zheng Hacker <hackerzheng666@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 于2023年11月6日周一 23:48写道:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On November 6, 2023 3:44:53 PM Zheng Hacker <hackerzheng666@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks! I didn't test it for I don't have a device. Very appreciated
> > >>>>> if anyone could help with that.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I would volunteer, but it made me dig deep and not sure if there is a
> > >>>> problem to solve here.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> brcmf_cfg80211_detach() calls wl_deinit_priv() -> brcmf_abort_scanning() ->
> > >>>> brcmf_notify_escan_complete() which does delete the timer.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> What am I missing here?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks four your detailed review. I did see the code and not sure if
> > >>> brcmf_notify_escan_complete
> > >>> would be triggered for sure. So in the first version I want to delete
> > >>> the pending timer ahead of time.
> > >>
> > >> Why requesting a CVE when you are not sure? Seems a bit hasty to put it
> > >> mildly.
> > >
> > > I'm sure the issue exists because there's only cancler of timer but not woker.
> > > As there's similar CVEs before like : https://github.com/V4bel/CVE-2022-41218,
> > > I submit it as soon as I found it.
> >
> > Ah, yes. The cancel_work_sync() can also be done in
> > brcmf_notify_escan_complete().
>
> AFAIUC, brcmf_notify_scan_complete() is called from the work itself,
> too, hence you can't issue cancel_work_sync() there (unless you make
> it conditional).
>
>
> Takashi




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux