Thread (8 messages) 8 messages, 4 authors, 2026-06-15

Re: [BUG] FORTIFY: memcpy overflow in skb_tunnel_info_unclone() from geneve_xmit()

From: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Date: 2026-06-10 19:51:19

On Mon, Jun 08, 2026 at 11:41:37AM +0200, Ilya Maximets wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
On 6/8/26 10:25 AM, Johan Thomsen wrote:
quoted
Hello,

I am seeing what looks like a kernel bug in the Geneve/OVS/vhost
transmit path on a Talos Linux node running Kube-ovn with Geneve
overlay and KubeVirt VM traffic.

Environment:

Kernel: 6.18.33-talos
Distro: Talos v1.13.3

Compiler/config:

CONFIG_CC_VERSION_TEXT="clang version 22.1.2"
CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG=y
CONFIG_LTO=y
CONFIG_LTO_CLANG=y
CONFIG_LTO_CLANG_THIN=y
CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE=y

Hardware: HPE ProLiant DL325 Gen11, AMD EPYC

NIC driver: bnxt_en

Workload/network:

Kube-OVN, Geneve overlay
Open vSwitch datapath
KubeVirt/QEMU VM traffic via vhost/tap

Relevant console output:

[  648.742603] memcpy: detected buffer overflow: 104 byte write of
buffer size 96
[  648.749907] WARNING: CPU: 61 PID: 27020 at
lib/string_helpers.c:1036 __fortify_report+0x45/0x60
[  648.758689] Modules linked in: dm_round_robin dm_multipath lpfc
nvmet_fc nvmet intel_rapl_msr intel_rapl_common ahci nvme_auth bnxt_en
nvme hpilo hkdf libahci sp5100_tco watchdog k10temp
[  648.775429] CPU: 61 UID: 107 PID: 27020 Comm: vhost-27002 Not
tainted 6.18.29-talos #1 PREEMPT(none)
[  648.784735] Hardware name: HPE ProLiant DL325 Gen11/ProLiant DL325
Gen11, BIOS 2.84 11/05/2025
[  648.890478]  skb_tunnel_info_unclone+0x179/0x190
[  648.895152]  geneve_xmit+0x7fe/0xe00
[  648.907240]  dev_hard_start_xmit+0xa7/0x1f0
[  648.911479]  __dev_queue_xmit+0x864/0xf40
[  648.919688]  do_execute_actions+0x9b9/0x1be0
[  648.927727]  ovs_execute_actions+0x58/0x170
[  648.931960]  ovs_dp_process_packet+0xb1/0x1c0
[  648.936370]  ovs_vport_receive+0x90/0x100
[  648.940428]  netdev_frame_hook+0x146/0x1a0
[  648.954093]  __netif_receive_skb+0x3f/0x160
[  648.958324]  process_backlog+0x10c/0x210
[  648.962295]  __napi_poll+0x2f/0x190
[  648.965832]  net_rx_action+0x2e3/0x500
[  648.969632]  handle_softirqs+0xe7/0x310
[  648.985387]  tun_get_user+0x137e/0x1510
[  649.005878]  handle_tx+0x41f/0xd30
[  649.029014]  vhost_run_work_list+0x52/0x90
[  649.033162]  vhost_task_fn+0xc2/0x140
[  649.064145] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
[  649.068820] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[  649.073489] kernel BUG at lib/string_helpers.c:1043!

I don't know whether this is a real overflow or a FORTIFY false-positive.
Looks like a false-positive from the __counted_by fortification.

I'd guess something like this would fit it:
diff --git a/include/net/dst_metadata.h b/include/net/dst_metadata.h
index 1fc2fb03ce3f9..e51c3795da474 100644
--- a/include/net/dst_metadata.h
+++ b/include/net/dst_metadata.h
@@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ static inline struct metadata_dst *tun_dst_unclone(struct sk_buff *skb)
 	if (!new_md)
 		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
 
+	new_md->u.tun_info.options_len = md_size;
 	memcpy(&new_md->u.tun_info, &md_dst->u.tun_info,
 	       sizeof(struct ip_tunnel_info) + md_size);
Speaking to this solution, it also makes sense, but does look redundant
to the memcpy that follows it. I wonder something more in between would
be better (the memcpy isn't needed to copy a struct, either):

	new_md->u.tun_info = md_dst->u.tun_info;
	memcpy(new_md->u.tun_info.options, md_dst->u.tun_info.options,
		md_dst->u.tun_info.options_len);

Is this the only place in the kernel where a struct ip_tunnel_info is
being copied? The above really looks like an open-coded helper. :)

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help