Re: [PATCH] unix: avoid use-after-free in ep_remove_wait_queue
From: Rainer Weikusat <hidden>
Date: 2015-11-12 19:11:41
Also in:
linux-fsdevel, lkml
Jason Baron [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
+ +/* Needs sk unix state lock. After recv_ready indicated not ready, + * establish peer_wait connection if still needed. + */ +static int unix_dgram_peer_wake_me(struct sock *sk, struct sock *other) +{ + int connected; + + connected = unix_dgram_peer_wake_connect(sk, other); + + if (unix_recvq_full(other)) + return 1; + + if (connected) + unix_dgram_peer_wake_disconnect(sk, other); + + return 0; +} +So the comment above this function says 'needs unix state lock', however the usage in unix_dgram_sendmsg() has the 'other' lock, while the usage in unix_dgram_poll() has the 'sk' lock. So this looks racy.
That's one thing which is broken with this patch. Judging from a 'quick'
look at the _dgram_sendmsg code, the unix_state_lock(other) will need to
be turned into a unix_state_double_lock(sk, other) and the remaining
code changed accordingly (since all of the checks must be done without
unlocking other).
There's also something else seriously wrong with the present patch: Some
code in unix_dgram_connect presently (with this change) looks like this:
/*
* If it was connected, reconnect.
*/
if (unix_peer(sk)) {
struct sock *old_peer = unix_peer(sk);
unix_peer(sk) = other;
if (unix_dgram_peer_wake_disconnect(sk, other))
wake_up_interruptible_poll(sk_sleep(sk),
POLLOUT |
POLLWRNORM |
POLLWRBAND);
unix_state_double_unlock(sk, other);
if (other != old_peer)
unix_dgram_disconnected(sk, old_peer);
sock_put(old_peer);
and trying to disconnect from a peer the socket is just being
connected to is - of course - "flowering tomfoolery" (literal
translation of the German "bluehender Bloedsinn") --- it needs to
disconnect from old_peer instead.
I'll address the suggestion and send an updated patch "later today" (may
become "early tomorrow"). I have some code addressing both issues but
that's part of a release of 'our' kernel fork, ie, 3.2.54-based I'll
need to do 'soon'.