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

binder: fix node UAF 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 in order to acquire the node->lock first (lock nesting order). This can race with binder_node_release() and trigger a use-after-free:

================================================================== BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in _raw_spin_lock+0xe4/0x19c Write of size 4 at addr ffff53c04c29dd04 by task freeze/640

CPU: 5 UID: 0 PID: 640 Comm: freeze Not tainted 6.11.0-07343-ga727812a8d45 #17 Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) Call trace: _raw_spin_lock+0xe4/0x19c binder_add_freeze_work+0x148/0x478 binder_ioctl+0x1e70/0x25ac __arm64_sys_ioctl+0x124/0x190

Allocated by task 637: __kmalloc_cache_noprof+0x12c/0x27c binder_new_node+0x50/0x700 binder_transaction+0x35ac/0x6f74 binder_thread_write+0xfb8/0x42a0 binder_ioctl+0x18f0/0x25ac __arm64_sys_ioctl+0x124/0x190

Freed by task 637: kfree+0xf0/0x330 binder_thread_read+0x1e88/0x3a68 binder_ioctl+0x16d8/0x25ac __arm64_sys_ioctl+0x124/0x190

Fix the race by taking a temporary reference on the node before releasing the proc->inner lock. This ensures the node remains alive while in use.

Weakness

The product contains a concurrent code sequence that 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 operating concurrently.

Affected Software

Extended Description

A race condition occurs within concurrent environments, and it 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. 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/38fbefeb2c140b581ed7de8117a5c90d6dd89c22
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/dc8aea47b928cc153b591b3558829ce42f685074