CVE-2024-50066

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

mm/mremap: fix move_normal_pmd/retract_page_tables race

In mremap(), move_page_tables() looks at the type of the PMD entry and the specified address range to figure out by which method the next chunk of page table entries should be moved.

At that point, the mmap_lock is held in write mode, but no rmap locks are held yet. For PMD entries that point to page tables and are fully covered by the source address range, move_pgt_entry(NORMAL_PMD, …) is called, which first takes rmap locks, then does move_normal_pmd(). move_normal_pmd() takes the necessary page table locks at source and destination, then moves an entire page table from the source to the destination.

The problem is: The rmap locks, which protect against concurrent page table removal by retract_page_tables() in the THP code, are only taken after the PMD entry has been read and it has been decided how to move it. So we can race as follows (with two processes that have mappings of the same tmpfs file that is stored on a tmpfs mount with huge=advise); note that process A accesses page tables through the MM while process B does it through the file rmap:

process A process B ========= ========= mremap mremap_to move_vma move_page_tables get_old_pmd alloc_new_pmd *** PREEMPT *** madvise(MADV_COLLAPSE) do_madvise madvise_walk_vmas madvise_vma_behavior madvise_collapse hpage_collapse_scan_file collapse_file retract_page_tables i_mmap_lock_read(mapping) pmdp_collapse_flush i_mmap_unlock_read(mapping) move_pgt_entry(NORMAL_PMD, …) take_rmap_locks move_normal_pmd drop_rmap_locks

When this happens, move_normal_pmd() can end up creating bogus PMD entries in the line pmd_populate(mm, new_pmd, pmd_pgtable(pmd)). The effect depends on arch-specific and machine-specific details; on x86, you can end up with physical page 0 mapped as a page table, which is likely exploitable for user->kernel privilege escalation.

Fix the race by letting process B recheck that the PMD still points to a page table after the rmap locks have been taken. Otherwise, we bail and let the caller fall back to the PTE-level copying path, which will then bail immediately at the pmd_none() check.

Bug reachability: Reaching this bug requires that you can create shmem/file THP mappings - anonymous THP uses different code that doesnt zap stuff under rmap locks. File THP is gated on an experimental config flag (CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS), so on normal distro kernels you need shmem THP to hit this bug. As far as I know, getting shmem THP normally requires that you can mount your own tmpfs with the right mount flags, which would require creating your own user+mount namespace; though I dont know if some distros maybe enable shmem THP by default or something like that.

Bug impact: This issue can likely be used for user->kernel privilege escalation when it is reachable.

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/1552ce9ce8af47c0fe911682e5e1855e25851ca9
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/17396e32f975130b3e6251f024c8807d192e4c3e
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/6fa1066fc5d00cb9f1b0e83b7ff6ef98d26ba2aa
• https://project-zero.issues.chromium.org/issues/371047675