diff mbox series

[net] smc: disallow TCP_ULP in smc_setsockopt()

Message ID 20210410181732.25995-1-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com
State New
Headers show
Series [net] smc: disallow TCP_ULP in smc_setsockopt() | expand

Commit Message

Cong Wang April 10, 2021, 6:17 p.m. UTC
From: Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>

syzbot is able to setup kTLS on an SMC socket, which coincidentally
uses sk_user_data too, later, kTLS treats it as psock so triggers a
refcnt warning. The cause is that smc_setsockopt() simply calls
TCP setsockopt(). I do not think it makes sense to setup kTLS on
top of SMC, so we can just disallow this.

Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+b54a1ce86ba4a623b7f0@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Cc: Karsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>
---
 net/smc/af_smc.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Karsten Graul April 12, 2021, 6:52 a.m. UTC | #1
On 10/04/2021 20:17, Cong Wang wrote:
> From: Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>

> 

> syzbot is able to setup kTLS on an SMC socket, which coincidentally

> uses sk_user_data too, later, kTLS treats it as psock so triggers a

> refcnt warning. The cause is that smc_setsockopt() simply calls

> TCP setsockopt(). I do not think it makes sense to setup kTLS on

> top of SMC, so we can just disallow this.

> 

> Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+b54a1ce86ba4a623b7f0@syzkaller.appspotmail.com

> Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>

> Cc: Karsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com>

> Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>

> ---

>  net/smc/af_smc.c | 4 +++-

>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

> 

> diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c

> index 47340b3b514f..0d4d6d28f20c 100644

> --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c

> +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c

> @@ -2162,6 +2162,9 @@ static int smc_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,

>  	struct smc_sock *smc;

>  	int val, rc;

>  

> +	if (optname == TCP_ULP)

> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;

> +

>  	smc = smc_sk(sk);

>  

>  	/* generic setsockopts reaching us here always apply to the

> @@ -2186,7 +2189,6 @@ static int smc_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,

>  	if (rc || smc->use_fallback)

>  		goto out;

>  	switch (optname) {

> -	case TCP_ULP:


Should'nt it return -EOPNOTSUPP in that case, too?

>  	case TCP_FASTOPEN:

>  	case TCP_FASTOPEN_CONNECT:

>  	case TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY:

> 


-- 
Karsten

(I'm a dude)
Cong Wang April 12, 2021, 7:09 p.m. UTC | #2
On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 11:52 PM Karsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>

>

>

> On 10/04/2021 20:17, Cong Wang wrote:

> > From: Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>

> >

> > syzbot is able to setup kTLS on an SMC socket, which coincidentally

> > uses sk_user_data too, later, kTLS treats it as psock so triggers a

> > refcnt warning. The cause is that smc_setsockopt() simply calls

> > TCP setsockopt(). I do not think it makes sense to setup kTLS on

> > top of SMC, so we can just disallow this.

> >

> > Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+b54a1ce86ba4a623b7f0@syzkaller.appspotmail.com

> > Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>

> > Cc: Karsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com>

> > Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>

> > ---

> >  net/smc/af_smc.c | 4 +++-

> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

> >

> > diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c

> > index 47340b3b514f..0d4d6d28f20c 100644

> > --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c

> > +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c

> > @@ -2162,6 +2162,9 @@ static int smc_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,

> >       struct smc_sock *smc;

> >       int val, rc;

> >

> > +     if (optname == TCP_ULP)

> > +             return -EOPNOTSUPP;

> > +

> >       smc = smc_sk(sk);

> >

> >       /* generic setsockopts reaching us here always apply to the

> > @@ -2186,7 +2189,6 @@ static int smc_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,

> >       if (rc || smc->use_fallback)

> >               goto out;

> >       switch (optname) {

> > -     case TCP_ULP:

>

> Should'nt it return -EOPNOTSUPP in that case, too?


I do not think I understand this. In case of TCP_ULP, we will
not even reach this switch case after my patch.

Thanks.
Karsten Graul April 13, 2021, 7:48 a.m. UTC | #3
On 10/04/2021 20:17, Cong Wang wrote:
> From: Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>

> 

> syzbot is able to setup kTLS on an SMC socket, which coincidentally

> uses sk_user_data too, later, kTLS treats it as psock so triggers a

> refcnt warning. The cause is that smc_setsockopt() simply calls

> TCP setsockopt(). I do not think it makes sense to setup kTLS on

> top of SMC, so we can just disallow this.

> 

> Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+b54a1ce86ba4a623b7f0@syzkaller.appspotmail.com

> Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>

> Cc: Karsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com>

> Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>

> ---


Signed-off-by: Karsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c
index 47340b3b514f..0d4d6d28f20c 100644
--- a/net/smc/af_smc.c
+++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c
@@ -2162,6 +2162,9 @@  static int smc_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 	struct smc_sock *smc;
 	int val, rc;
 
+	if (optname == TCP_ULP)
+		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+
 	smc = smc_sk(sk);
 
 	/* generic setsockopts reaching us here always apply to the
@@ -2186,7 +2189,6 @@  static int smc_setsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname,
 	if (rc || smc->use_fallback)
 		goto out;
 	switch (optname) {
-	case TCP_ULP:
 	case TCP_FASTOPEN:
 	case TCP_FASTOPEN_CONNECT:
 	case TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY: