[RESEND PATCH v2] media: mtk-jpeg: Fix use after free bug due to uncanceled work
Zheng Hacker
hackerzheng666 at gmail.com
Tue Sep 12 02:29:06 PDT 2023
Hi Dmitry,
The patch is on the stable queue. Could you please take a look at my
analysis? Thanks for your help.
Best regards,
Zheng
Zheng Hacker <hackerzheng666 at gmail.com> 于2023年9月5日周二 12:24写道：
>
> Friendly ping.
>
> Zheng Hacker <hackerzheng666 at gmail.com> 于2023年8月31日周四 16:18写道：
> >
> > Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko at collabora.com> 于2023年8月28日周一 10:04写道：
> > >
> > > On 8/24/23 11:20, Zheng Hacker wrote:
> > > > Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko at collabora.com> 于2023年8月23日周三 02:51写道：
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> Hello Zheng,
> > > >>
> > > >> On 7/7/23 12:24, Zheng Wang wrote:
> > > >>> In mtk_jpeg_probe, &jpeg->job_timeout_work is bound with
> > > >>> mtk_jpeg_job_timeout_work. Then mtk_jpeg_dec_device_run
> > > >>> and mtk_jpeg_enc_device_run may be called to start the
> > > >>> work.
> > > >>> If we remove the module which will call mtk_jpeg_remove
> > > >>> to make cleanup, there may be a unfinished work. The
> > > >>> possible sequence is as follows, which will cause a
> > > >>> typical UAF bug.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Fix it by canceling the work before cleanup in the mtk_jpeg_remove
> > > >>>
> > > >>> CPU0 CPU1
> > > >>>
> > > >>> |mtk_jpeg_job_timeout_work
> > > >>> mtk_jpeg_remove |
> > > >>> v4l2_m2m_release |
> > > >>> kfree(m2m_dev); |
> > > >>> |
> > > >>> | v4l2_m2m_get_curr_priv
> > > >>> | m2m_dev->curr_ctx //use
> > > >>> Fixes: b2f0d2724ba4 ("[media] vcodec: mediatek: Add Mediatek JPEG Decoder Driver")
> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Zheng Wang <zyytlz.wz at 163.com>
> > > >>> ---
> > > >>> - v2: use cancel_delayed_work_sync instead of cancel_delayed_work suggested by Kyrie.
> > > >>> ---
> > > >>> drivers/media/platform/mediatek/jpeg/mtk_jpeg_core.c | 1 +
> > > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/mediatek/jpeg/mtk_jpeg_core.c b/drivers/media/platform/mediatek/jpeg/mtk_jpeg_core.c
> > > >>> index 0051f372a66c..6069ecf420b0 100644
> > > >>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/mediatek/jpeg/mtk_jpeg_core.c
> > > >>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/mediatek/jpeg/mtk_jpeg_core.c
> > > >>> @@ -1816,6 +1816,7 @@ static void mtk_jpeg_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > >>> {
> > > >>> struct mtk_jpeg_dev *jpeg = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > > >>>
> > > >>> + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&jpeg->job_timeout_work);
> > > >>> pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
> > > >>> video_unregister_device(jpeg->vdev);
> > > >>> v4l2_m2m_release(jpeg->m2m_dev);
> > > >>
> > > >> AFAICS, there is a fundamental problem here. The job_timeout_work uses
> > > >> v4l2_m2m_get_curr_priv() and at the time when driver module is unloaded,
> > > >> all the v4l contexts must be closed and released. Hence the
> > > >> v4l2_m2m_get_curr_priv() shall return NULL and crash the kernel when
> > > >> work is executed before cancel_delayed_work_sync().
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Hi Dmitry,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your reply. I think you're right. As m2m_dev is freed in
> > > > v4l2_m2m_release,
> > > > the invoking in v4l2_m2m_get_curr_priv might cause either UAF or null
> > > > pointer dereference
> > > > bug. I am sure that context is closed when we invoke mtk_jpeg_remove.
> > > > But I'm not sure if
> > > > context is released when mtk_jpegdec_timeout_work running.
> > > >
> > > >> At the time when mtk_jpeg_remove() is invoked, there shall be no
> > > >> job_timeout_work running in background because all jobs should be
> > > >> completed before context is released. If you'll look at
> > > >> v4l2_m2m_cancel_job(), you can see that it waits for the task completion
> > > >> before closing context.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, so I think the better way is to put the cancel_delayed_work_sync
> > > > invoking into
> > > > v4l2_m2m_ctx_release function?
> > >
> > > The v4l2_m2m_ctx_release() already should wait for the job_timeout_work
> > > completion or for the interrupt fire. Apparently it doesn't work in
> > > yours case. You'll need to debug why v4l job or job_timeout_work is
> > > running after v4l2_m2m_ctx_release(), it shouldn't happen.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, v4l2_m2m_cancel_job waits for m2m_ctx->job_flags to be ~TRANS_RUNNING,
> > the mtk_jpeg_job_timeout_work will finally invoke v4l2_m2m_job_finish
> > to trigger that.
> >
> > However, this is not the only path to call v4l2_m2m_job_finish. Here
> > is a invoking chain:
> > v4l_streamon
> > ->v4l2_m2m_ioctl_streamon
> > ->v4l2_m2m_streamon
> > ->v4l2_m2m_try_schedule
> > ->v4l2_m2m_try_run
> > ->mtk_jpeg_dec_device_run
> > ->schedule_delayed_work(&jpeg->job_timeout_work...
> > ->error path goto dec_end
> > ->v4l2_m2m_job_finish
> >
> > In some specific situation, it starts the worker and also calls
> > v4l2_m2m_job_finish, which might
> > make v4l2_m2m_cancel_job continues.
> >
> > > The interrupt handler cancels job_timeout_work, you shouldn't need to
> > > flush the work.
> >
> > It will, but as I said, there might be an early invocation chain to
> > start the work.(Not very sure)
> >
> > >
> > > Technically, interrupt handler may race with job_timeout_work, but the
> > > timeout is set to 1 second and in practice should be difficult to
> > > trigger the race. The interrupt handler needs to be threaded, it should
> > > use cancel_delayed_work_sync() and check the return value of this function.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, it's better to use cancel_delayed_work_sync here.
> >
> > > >>
> > > >> You shouldn't be able to remove driver module while it has active/opened
> > > >> v4l contexts. If you can do that, then this is yours bug that needs to
> > > >> be fixed.
> > > >>
> > > >> In addition to this all, the job_timeout_work is initialized only for
> > > >> the single-core JPEG device. I'd expect this patch should crash
> > > >> multi-core JPEG devices.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I think that's true. As I'm not familiar with the code here. Could you
> > > > please give me some advice about the patch?
> > >
> > > We'll need to understand why v4l2_m2m_ctx_release() doesn't work as
> > > expected before thinking about the patch.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Dmitry
> > >
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list