CVE-2022-49443

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

list: fix a data-race around ep->rdllist

ep_poll() first calls ep_events_available() with no lock held and checks if ep->rdllist is empty by list_empty_careful(), which reads rdllist->prev. Thus all accesses to it need some protection to avoid store/load-tearing.

Note INIT_LIST_HEAD_RCU() already has the annotation for both prev and next.

Commit bf3b9f6372c4 (epoll: Add busy poll support to epoll with socket fds.) added the first lockless ep_events_available(), and commit c5a282e9635e (fs/epoll: reduce the scope of wq lock in epoll_wait()) made some ep_events_available() calls lockless and added single call under a lock, finally commit e59d3c64cba6 (epoll: eliminate unnecessary lock for zero timeout) made the last ep_events_available() lockless.

BUG: KCSAN: data-race in do_epoll_wait / do_epoll_wait

write to 0xffff88810480c7d8 of 8 bytes by task 1802 on cpu 0: INIT_LIST_HEAD include/linux/list.h:38 [inline] list_splice_init include/linux/list.h:492 [inline] ep_start_scan fs/eventpoll.c:622 [inline] ep_send_events fs/eventpoll.c:1656 [inline] ep_poll fs/eventpoll.c:1806 [inline] do_epoll_wait+0x4eb/0xf40 fs/eventpoll.c:2234 do_epoll_pwait fs/eventpoll.c:2268 [inline] __do_sys_epoll_pwait fs/eventpoll.c:2281 [inline] __se_sys_epoll_pwait+0x12b/0x240 fs/eventpoll.c:2275 __x64_sys_epoll_pwait+0x74/0x80 fs/eventpoll.c:2275 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x44/0xd0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae

read to 0xffff88810480c7d8 of 8 bytes by task 1799 on cpu 1: list_empty_careful include/linux/list.h:329 [inline] ep_events_available fs/eventpoll.c:381 [inline] ep_poll fs/eventpoll.c:1797 [inline] do_epoll_wait+0x279/0xf40 fs/eventpoll.c:2234 do_epoll_pwait fs/eventpoll.c:2268 [inline] __do_sys_epoll_pwait fs/eventpoll.c:2281 [inline] __se_sys_epoll_pwait+0x12b/0x240 fs/eventpoll.c:2275 __x64_sys_epoll_pwait+0x74/0x80 fs/eventpoll.c:2275 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x44/0xd0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae

value changed: 0xffff88810480c7d0 -> 0xffff888103c15098

Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on: CPU: 1 PID: 1799 Comm: syz-fuzzer Tainted: G W 5.17.0-rc7-syzkaller-dirty #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 01/01/2011

Weakness

The product contains a code sequence that can run concurrently with other code, and the code sequence requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence that is operating concurrently.

Affected Software

Extended Description

This can have security implications when the expected synchronization is in security-critical code, such as recording whether a user is authenticated or modifying important state information that should not be influenced by an outsider. A race condition occurs within concurrent environments, and is effectively a property of a code sequence. Depending on the context, a code sequence may be in the form of a function call, a small number of instructions, a series of program invocations, etc. A race condition violates these properties, which are closely related:

A race condition exists when an “interfering code sequence” can still access the shared resource, violating exclusivity. Programmers may assume that certain code sequences execute too quickly to be affected by an interfering code sequence; when they are not, this violates atomicity. For example, the single “x++” statement may appear atomic at the code layer, but it is actually non-atomic at the instruction layer, since it involves a read (the original value of x), followed by a computation (x+1), followed by a write (save the result to x). The interfering code sequence could be “trusted” or “untrusted.” A trusted interfering code sequence occurs within the product; it cannot be modified by the attacker, and it can only be invoked indirectly. An untrusted interfering code sequence can be authored directly by the attacker, and typically it is external to the vulnerable product.

Potential Mitigations

• Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring.
• Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/26.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/29.html

References

• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5d5d993f16be15d124be7b8ec71b28ef7b7dc3af
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/cb3e48f7a35033deb9455abe3932e63cb500b9eb
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d679ae94fdd5d3ab00c35078f5af5f37e068b03d
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e039c0b5985999b150594126225e1ee51df7b4c9