Hi all, I do not have a way of reproducing this decent enough to recommend: I'll keep digging. The page belongs to a slub when the fragment is being constructed in __skb_fill_page_desc(), see the instrumentation I used below. When usercopy triggers, .coals shows values of 2/3 for 128/192 bytes respectively. The question is how the RX sk_buff ends up having data fragment in a PageSlab page. Some network drivers use netdev_alloc_frag() so pages indeed come from page_frag allocator. Others (mellanox, intel) just alloc_page() when filling their RX descriptors. In both cases the pages will be refcounted properly. I suspect my kernel TCP traffic that uses kernel_sendpage() for bio pages AND slub pages. Thanks a lot! Anton diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h index a098d95..7cd744c 100644 --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ #include #include #include +#include /* The interface for checksum offload between the stack and networking drivers * is as follows... @@ -316,7 +317,8 @@ struct skb_frag_struct { } page; #if (BITS_PER_LONG > 32) || (PAGE_SIZE >= 65536) __u32 page_offset; - __u32 size; + __u16 size; + __u16 coals; #else __u16 page_offset; __u16 size; @@ -1850,9 +1852,11 @@ static inline void __skb_fill_page_desc(struct sk_buff *skb, int i, */ frag->page.p = page; frag->page_offset = off; + frag->coals = 0; skb_frag_size_set(frag, size); page = compound_head(page); + *WARN_ON(PageSlab(page) && (page->slab_cache->size < size)); // does NOT trigger* if (page_is_pfmemalloc(page)) skb->pfmemalloc = true; } @@ -2849,10 +2853,14 @@ static inline bool skb_can_coalesce(struct sk_buff *skb, int i, const struct page *page, int off) { if (i) { - const struct skb_frag_struct *frag = &skb_shinfo(skb)->frags[i - 1]; + struct skb_frag_struct *frag = &skb_shinfo(skb)->frags[i - 1]; - return page == skb_frag_page(frag) && + bool ret = page == skb_frag_page(frag) && off == frag->page_offset + skb_frag_size(frag); + if (unlikely(ret)) *+ if (PageSlab(compound_head((struct page *)page)))* *+ frag->coals++;* + return ret; } return false; } On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 1:58 PM, Matthew Wilcox > wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 01:49:38PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 12:02 PM, Laura Abbott > wrote: > >> > (cc-ing some interested people) > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On 05/31/2018 05:03 PM, Anton Eidelman wrote: > >> >> Here's a rare issue I reproduce on 4.12.10 (centos config): full log > >> >> sample below. > >> > >> Thanks for digging into this! Do you have any specific reproducer for > >> this? If so, I'd love to try a bisection, as I'm surprised this has > >> only now surfaced: hardened usercopy was introduced in 4.8 ... > >> > >> >> An innocent process (dhcpclient) is about to receive a datagram, but > >> >> during skb_copy_datagram_iter() usercopy triggers a BUG in: > >> >> usercopy.c:check_heap_object() -> slub.c:__check_heap_object(), > because > >> >> the sk_buff fragment being copied crosses the 64-byte slub object > boundary. > >> >> > >> >> Example __check_heap_object() context: > >> >> n=128 << usually 128, sometimes 192. > >> >> object_size=64 > >> >> s->size=64 > >> >> page_address(page)=0xffff880233f7c000 > >> >> ptr=0xffff880233f7c540 > >> >> > >> >> My take on the root cause: > >> >> When adding data to an skb, new data is appended to the current > >> >> fragment if the new chunk immediately follows the last one: by simply > >> >> increasing the frag->size, skb_frag_size_add(). > >> >> See include/linux/skbuff.h:skb_can_coalesce() callers. > >> > >> Oooh, sneaky: > >> return page == skb_frag_page(frag) && > >> off == frag->page_offset + skb_frag_size(frag); > >> > >> Originally I was thinking that slab red-zoning would get triggered > >> too, but I see the above is checking to see if these are precisely > >> neighboring allocations, I think. > >> > >> But then ... how does freeing actually work? I'm really not sure how > >> this seeming layering violation could be safe in other areas? > > > > I'm confused ... I thought skb frags came from the page_frag allocator, > > not the slab allocator. But then why would the slab hardening trigger? > > Well that would certainly make more sense (well, the sense about > alloc/free). Having it overlap with a slab allocation, though, that's > quite bad. Perhaps this is a very odd use-after-free case? I.e. freed > page got allocated to slab, and when it got copied out, usercopy found > it spanned a slub object? > > [ 655.602500] usercopy: kernel memory exposure attempt detected from > ffff88022a31aa00 (kmalloc-64) (192 bytes) > > This wouldn't be the first time usercopy triggered due to a memory > corruption... > > -Kees > > -- > Kees Cook > Pixel Security >