Re: [syzbot] [mptcp?] general protection fault in proc_scheduler
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Date: 2025-01-05 19:54:37
Also in:
lkml, mptcp
On Sun, Jan 05, 2025 at 05:52:19PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Sun, Jan 5, 2025 at 12:29 PM Al Viro [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Sun, Jan 05, 2025 at 09:32:36AM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:quoted
According to grep, we have many other places directly reading current->nsproxy->net_ns For instance in net/sctp/sysctl.c Should we change them all ?Depends - do you want their contents match the netns of opener (as, AFAICS, for ipv4 sysctls) or that of the reader?I am only worried that a malicious user could crash the host with current kernels, not about this MPTP crash, but all unaware users of current->nsproxy in sysctl handlers.
I don't hate your mitigation in proc_sysctl.c, but IMO there are two problems mixed here - one is that we probably should have access to per-netns sysctl table act on the netns it had been created for, which may not coincide with reader's/writer's netns and another is that access to current->nsproxy->netns would simply oops if attempted when current->nsproxy had been dropped. So I suspect that current->nsproxy->netns shouldn't be used in per-netns sysctls for consistency sake (note that it can get more serious than just consistency, if you have e.g. a spinlock taken in something hanging off current netns to protect access to something table->data points to). As for the mitigation in fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c... might be useful, if it comes with a clear comment about the reasons it's there.