Message ID | 20220721101018.17902-1-code@siddh.me |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Headers | show |
Series | [RESEND] net: Fix UAF in ieee80211_scan_rx() | expand |
Hello Lukas, Sorry for the late reply. On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 16:05:01 +0530 Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > Siddh, > > I had a look at the Bug report above. Currently, we do not have any > syzkaller or C reproducer to confirm that the bug was actually fixed. > > Now, that you have a supposed fix for the issue: > Can you write a 'stress test' and (qemu) setup script that eventually > makes that bug trigger (e.g., if we run the stress test for two or > three days it will eventually trigger)? Then, we can also use that to > confirm that your patch fixes the issue (beyond the normal sanity code > review). > > This is certainly something you can do on your side to move this patch > forward, and other developers with testing infrastructure can pick up > and confirm your tests and results independently. I have been intermittently looking about this for the past few days. Since such test creation is new to me, I am stuck at how to go about calling the requisite function. What I have gathered is that I need to use the netlink API or related tool and issue the scan and recieve commands. Since qemu by default doesn't have a WiFi interface setup by default, I was looking at simulation and came across the mac80211_hwsim module. After building the kernel it, I tried using `iw` command for scanning with the two phy simulated devices, but I seem to hit a deadend due to not being able to properly use them for the task at hand. Do you have any resources or/and examples on such "stress tests"? > I hope this helps, otherwise you will just need to have some patience. > > Best regards, > > Lukas Eric had replied to me on the original email soon after, and I have sent a v2. Though, I still want to see how people go about making the tests, so any resources for further exploring will be useful. Thanks, Siddh
diff --git a/include/net/cfg80211.h b/include/net/cfg80211.h index 6d02e12e4702..ba4a49884de8 100644 --- a/include/net/cfg80211.h +++ b/include/net/cfg80211.h @@ -2368,6 +2368,7 @@ struct cfg80211_scan_6ghz_params { * @n_6ghz_params: number of 6 GHz params * @scan_6ghz_params: 6 GHz params * @bssid: BSSID to scan for (most commonly, the wildcard BSSID) + * @rcu_head: (internal) RCU head to use for freeing */ struct cfg80211_scan_request { struct cfg80211_ssid *ssids; @@ -2397,6 +2398,7 @@ struct cfg80211_scan_request { bool scan_6ghz; u32 n_6ghz_params; struct cfg80211_scan_6ghz_params *scan_6ghz_params; + struct rcu_head rcu_head; /* keep last */ struct ieee80211_channel *channels[]; diff --git a/net/wireless/scan.c b/net/wireless/scan.c index 6d82bd9eaf8c..638b2805222c 100644 --- a/net/wireless/scan.c +++ b/net/wireless/scan.c @@ -988,7 +988,7 @@ void ___cfg80211_scan_done(struct cfg80211_registered_device *rdev, kfree(rdev->int_scan_req); rdev->int_scan_req = NULL; - kfree(rdev->scan_req); + kfree_rcu(rdev->scan_req, rcu_head); rdev->scan_req = NULL; if (!send_message)
ieee80211_scan_rx() tries to access scan_req->flags after a null check (see line 303 of mac80211/scan.c), but ___cfg80211_scan_done() uses kfree() on the scan_req (see line 991 of wireless/scan.c). This results in a UAF. ieee80211_scan_rx() is called inside a RCU read-critical section initiated by ieee80211_rx_napi() (see line 5043 of mac80211/rx.c). Thus, add an rcu_head to the scan_req struct so as to use kfree_rcu() instead of kfree() so that we don't free during the critical section. Bug report (3): https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=f9acff9bf08a845f225d Reported-by: syzbot+f9acff9bf08a845f225d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+6cb476b7c69916a0caca@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+9250865a55539d384347@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Signed-off-by: Siddh Raman Pant <code@siddh.me> --- Resending because didn't get any reply from maintainers for more than 2 weeks. include/net/cfg80211.h | 2 ++ net/wireless/scan.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)