Re: [PATCH] ipc/mqueue: Avoid relying on a stack reference past its expiry

From: Davidlohr Bueso
Date: Tue May 04 2021 - 17:53:46 EST


On 2021-05-04 08:55, Varad Gautam wrote:
do_mq_timedreceive calls wq_sleep with a stack local address. The
sender (do_mq_timedsend) uses this address to later call
pipelined_send.

This leads to a very hard to trigger race where a do_mq_timedreceive call
might return and leave do_mq_timedsend to rely on an invalid address,
causing the following crash:

[ 240.739977] RIP: 0010:wake_q_add_safe+0x13/0x60
[ 240.739991] Call Trace:
[ 240.739999] __x64_sys_mq_timedsend+0x2a9/0x490
[ 240.740003] ? auditd_test_task+0x38/0x40
[ 240.740007] ? auditd_test_task+0x38/0x40
[ 240.740011] do_syscall_64+0x80/0x680
[ 240.740017] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
[ 240.740019] RIP: 0033:0x7f5928e40343

The race occurs as:

1. do_mq_timedreceive calls wq_sleep with the address of
`struct ext_wait_queue` on function stack (aliased as `ewq_addr` here)
- it holds a valid `struct ext_wait_queue *` as long as the stack has
not been overwritten.

2. `ewq_addr` gets added to info->e_wait_q[RECV].list in wq_add, and
do_mq_timedsend receives it via wq_get_first_waiter(info, RECV) to call
__pipelined_op.

3. Sender calls __pipelined_op::smp_store_release(&this->state, STATE_READY).
Here is where the race window begins. (`this` is `ewq_addr`.)

4. If the receiver wakes up now in do_mq_timedreceive::wq_sleep, it
will see `state == STATE_READY` and break. `ewq_addr` gets removed from
info->e_wait_q[RECV].list.

5. do_mq_timedreceive returns, and `ewq_addr` is no longer guaranteed
to be a `struct ext_wait_queue *` since it was on do_mq_timedreceive's
stack. (Although the address may not get overwritten until another
function happens to touch it, which means it can persist around for an
indefinite time.)

6. do_mq_timedsend::__pipelined_op() still believes `ewq_addr` is a
`struct ext_wait_queue *`, and uses it to find a task_struct to pass
to the wake_q_add_safe call. In the lucky case where nothing has
overwritten `ewq_addr` yet, `ewq_addr->task` is the right task_struct.
In the unlucky case, __pipelined_op::wake_q_add_safe gets handed a
bogus address as the receiver's task_struct causing the crash.

do_mq_timedsend::__pipelined_op() should not dereference `this` after
setting STATE_READY, as the receiver counterpart is now free to return.
Change __pipelined_op to call wake_q_add_safe on the receiver's
task_struct returned by get_task_struct, instead of dereferencing
`this` which sits on the receiver's stack.

Fixes: c5b2cbdbdac563 ("ipc/mqueue.c: update/document memory barriers")

Right, historically we've always ensured that the waker does the state ready
write as the last operation, with or without lockless wake_qs. And this commit
broke this:

@@ -923,16 +988,11 @@ static inline void __pipelined_op(struct wake_q_head *wake_q,
struct ext_wait_queue *this)
{
list_del(&this->list);
- wake_q_add(wake_q, this->task);
- /*
- * Rely on the implicit cmpxchg barrier from wake_q_add such
- * that we can ensure that updating receiver->state is the last
- * write operation: As once set, the receiver can continue,
- * and if we don't have the reference count from the wake_q,
- * yet, at that point we can later have a use-after-free
- * condition and bogus wakeup.
- */
- this->state = STATE_READY;
+ get_task_struct(this->task);
+
+ /* see MQ_BARRIER for purpose/pairing */
+ smp_store_release(&this->state, STATE_READY);
+ wake_q_add_safe(wake_q, this->task);
}

.. so while addressing the race against get_task_struct() vs wakee exit we ended
up breaking the case where the task returns before the task is added to the wake_q
(which actually we explicitly re-orded :). So at this point we know that the
->state = STATE_READY must be done after the whole of the wake_q addition operation.

Instead, how about the following which closes the race altogether and simplifies the
code. This basically goes back to a correct version of fa6004ad4528
(ipc/mqueue: Implement lockless pipelined wakeups). And by correct I mean keeping the
smp_store_release() which ensures the proper wakeup semantics.

Thanks,
Davidlohr

diff --git a/ipc/mqueue.c b/ipc/mqueue.c
index 8031464ed4ae..43f0ae61c40b 100644
--- a/ipc/mqueue.c
+++ b/ipc/mqueue.c
@@ -76,14 +76,15 @@ struct posix_msg_tree_node {
* acquiring info->lock.
*
* MQ_BARRIER:
- * To achieve proper release/acquire memory barrier pairing, the state is set to
- * STATE_READY with smp_store_release(), and it is read with READ_ONCE followed
- * by smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(). In addition, wake_q_add_safe() is used.
+ * To achieve proper release/acquire memory barrier pairing, the state is
+ * set to STATE_READY with smp_store_release() such that it is the last write
+ * operation, in which afterwards the blocked task can immediately return and
+ * exit. It is read with READ_ONCE followed by smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep().
*
* This prevents the following races:
*
- * 1) With the simple wake_q_add(), the task could be gone already before
- * the increase of the reference happens
+ * 1) With the wake_q_add(), the task could be gone already before
+ * the increase of the reference happens:
* Thread A
* Thread B
* WRITE_ONCE(wait.state, STATE_NONE);
@@ -97,10 +98,27 @@ struct posix_msg_tree_node {
* sys_exit()
* get_task_struct() // UaF
*
- * Solution: Use wake_q_add_safe() and perform the get_task_struct() before
+ *
+ * 2) With the wake_q_add(), the waiter task could have returned from the
+ * syscall and overwritten it's task-allocated waiter before the sender
+ * can be added to the wake_q:
+ * Thread A
+ * Thread B
+ * WRITE_ONCE(wait.state, STATE_NONE);
+ * schedule_hrtimeout()
+ * ->state = STATE_READY
+ * <timeout returns>
+ * if (wait.state == STATE_READY) return;
+ * sysret to user space
+ * overwrite receiver's stack
+ * wake_q_add(A)
+ * if (cmpxchg()) // corrupted waiter
+ *
+ * Solution: Use wake_q_add() and queue the task for wakeup before
* the smp_store_release() that does ->state = STATE_READY.
*
- * 2) Without proper _release/_acquire barriers, the woken up task
+ *
+ * 3) Without proper _release/_acquire barriers, the woken up task
* could read stale data
*
* Thread A
@@ -116,7 +134,7 @@ struct posix_msg_tree_node {
*
* Solution: use _release and _acquire barriers.
*
- * 3) There is intentionally no barrier when setting current->state
+ * 4) There is intentionally no barrier when setting current->state
* to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE: spin_unlock(&info->lock) provides the
* release memory barrier, and the wakeup is triggered when holding
* info->lock, i.e. spin_lock(&info->lock) provided a pairing
@@ -1005,11 +1023,9 @@ static inline void __pipelined_op(struct wake_q_head *wake_q,
struct ext_wait_queue *this)
{
list_del(&this->list);
- get_task_struct(this->task);
-
+ wake_q_add(wake_q, this->task);
/* see MQ_BARRIER for purpose/pairing */
smp_store_release(&this->state, STATE_READY);
- wake_q_add_safe(wake_q, this->task);
}

/* pipelined_send() - send a message directly to the task waiting in