On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 9:43 PM Mickaël Salaün mic@digikod.net wrote:
Using Landlock objects and ruleset, it is possible to tag inodes according to a process's domain.
[...]
+static void release_inode(struct landlock_object *const object)
__releases(object->lock)
+{
struct inode *const inode = object->underobj;
struct super_block *sb;
if (!inode) {
spin_unlock(&object->lock);
return;
}
/*
* Protects against concurrent use by hook_sb_delete() of the reference
* to the underlying inode.
*/
object->underobj = NULL;
/*
* Makes sure that if the filesystem is concurrently unmounted,
* hook_sb_delete() will wait for us to finish iput().
*/
sb = inode->i_sb;
atomic_long_inc(&landlock_superblock(sb)->inode_refs);
spin_unlock(&object->lock);
/*
* Because object->underobj was not NULL, hook_sb_delete() and
* get_inode_object() guarantee that it is safe to reset
* landlock_inode(inode)->object while it is not NULL. It is therefore
* not necessary to lock inode->i_lock.
*/
rcu_assign_pointer(landlock_inode(inode)->object, NULL);
/*
* Now, new rules can safely be tied to @inode with get_inode_object().
*/
iput(inode);
if (atomic_long_dec_and_test(&landlock_superblock(sb)->inode_refs))
wake_up_var(&landlock_superblock(sb)->inode_refs);
+}
[...]
+static struct landlock_object *get_inode_object(struct inode *const inode) +{
struct landlock_object *object, *new_object;
struct landlock_inode_security *inode_sec = landlock_inode(inode);
rcu_read_lock();
+retry:
object = rcu_dereference(inode_sec->object);
if (object) {
if (likely(refcount_inc_not_zero(&object->usage))) {
rcu_read_unlock();
return object;
}
/*
* We are racing with release_inode(), the object is going
* away. Wait for release_inode(), then retry.
*/
spin_lock(&object->lock);
spin_unlock(&object->lock);
goto retry;
}
rcu_read_unlock();
/*
* If there is no object tied to @inode, then create a new one (without
* holding any locks).
*/
new_object = landlock_create_object(&landlock_fs_underops, inode);
if (IS_ERR(new_object))
return new_object;
/* Protects against concurrent get_inode_object() calls. */
spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
object = rcu_dereference_protected(inode_sec->object,
lockdep_is_held(&inode->i_lock));
rcu_dereference_protected() requires that inode_sec->object is not concurrently changed, but I think another thread could call get_inode_object() while we're in landlock_create_object(), and then we could race with the NULL write in release_inode() here? (It wouldn't actually be a UAF though because we're not actually accessing `object` here.) Or am I missing a lock that prevents this?
In v28 this wasn't an issue because release_inode() was holding inode->i_lock (and object->lock) during the NULL store; but in v29 and this version the NULL store in release_inode() moved out of the locked region. I think you could just move the NULL store in release_inode() back up (and maybe add a comment explaining the locking rules for landlock_inode(...)->object)?
(Or alternatively you could use rcu_dereference_raw() with a comment explaining that the read pointer is only used to check for NULL-ness, and that it is guaranteed that the pointer can't change if it is NULL and we're holding the lock. But that'd be needlessly complicated, I think.)
if (unlikely(object)) {
/* Someone else just created the object, bail out and retry. */
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
kfree(new_object);
rcu_read_lock();
goto retry;
}
rcu_assign_pointer(inode_sec->object, new_object);
/*
* @inode will be released by hook_sb_delete() on its superblock
* shutdown.
*/
ihold(inode);
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
return new_object;
+}