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

binder: fix OOB in binder_add_freeze_work()

In binder_add_freeze_work() we iterate over the proc->nodes with the proc->inner_lock held. However, this lock is temporarily dropped to acquire the node->lock first (lock nesting order). This can race with binder_deferred_release() which removes the nodes from the proc->nodes rbtree and adds them into binder_dead_nodes list. This leads to a broken iteration in binder_add_freeze_work() as rb_next() will use data from binder_dead_nodes, triggering an out-of-bounds access:

================================================================== BUG: KASAN: global-out-of-bounds in rb_next+0xfc/0x124 Read of size 8 at addr ffffcb84285f7170 by task freeze/660

CPU: 8 UID: 0 PID: 660 Comm: freeze Not tainted 6.11.0-07343-ga727812a8d45 #18 Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) Call trace: rb_next+0xfc/0x124 binder_add_freeze_work+0x344/0x534 binder_ioctl+0x1e70/0x25ac __arm64_sys_ioctl+0x124/0x190

The buggy address belongs to the variable: binder_dead_nodes+0x10/0x40 […]

This is possible because proc->nodes (rbtree) and binder_dead_nodes (list) share entries in binder_node through a union:

struct binder_node {
[...]
	union {
		struct rb_node rb_node;
		struct hlist_node dead_node;
	};

Fix the race by checking that the proc is still alive. If not, simply break out of the iteration.

Weakness

The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Affected Software

Potential Mitigations

• Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
• When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
• Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
• To reduce the likelihood of introducing an out-of-bounds read, ensure that you validate and ensure correct calculations for any length argument, buffer size calculation, or offset. Be especially careful of relying on a sentinel (i.e. special character such as NUL) in untrusted inputs.

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/540.html

References

• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/011e69a1b23011c0db3af4b8293fdd4522cc97b0
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/6b1be1da1f8279cf091266e71b5153c5b02aaff6