From: zjamg <ndaugoing@gmail.com>
To: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, Yu Kuai <yukuai@fygo.io>
Cc: Li Nan <magiclinan@didiglobal.com>, Xiao Ni <xiao@kernel.org>,
NeilBrown <neil@brown.name>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
zjamg <ndaugoing@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] md: fix bblog_size-driven OOB read in md_write_metadata()
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 16:38:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260917083820.57091-1-ndaugoing@gmail.com> (raw)
Hi,
This series fixes an out-of-bounds read in the md badblocks log (bblog)
write path. The on-disk bblog_size field is taken verbatim from the
member device superblock and used as the bio length in
md_write_metadata(), without any check against the size of the page that
actually backs the write.
This is a different issue from CVE-2026-89557, which fixed the
bblog_shift overflow. The bblog_size path is still unfixed.
Introduced by commit 2699b67223ac ("md: load/store badblock list from v1.x metadata").
Mechanism:
super_1_load() reads sb->bblog_size (__le16) from the member device
and stores it in rdev->badblocks.size via super_1_sync() (md.c:2316).
md_update_sb() then calls
md_write_metadata(mddev, rdev, rdev->badblocks.sector,
rdev->badblocks.size << 9, rdev->bb_page, 0);
(md.c:2944-2948). bb->size is sector_t, so 0xFFFF << 9 = 33553920
does not wrap. md_write_metadata() passes that length to
__bio_add_page() with a single 4 KiB page:
__bio_add_page(bio, page, size, 0)
__bio_add_page() is the no-check variant: after a WARN_ON_ONCE() it
unconditionally records bvec_set_page(page, size, offset) and bumps
bi_size/bi_vcnt. bio_full()'s second clause is
"bi_size > BIO_MAX_SIZE - len", with bi_size == 0 and
BIO_MAX_SIZE == UINT_MAX, so it is false and not even the WARN fires.
The 4 KiB page is recorded as a bvec with bv_len == 33553920.
Downstream bvec iteration (nth_page, bio_split_to_limits, etc.) then
reads past the end of the page, into whatever follows in the linear
map. KASAN reports slab-out-of-bounds or slab-use-after-free, and the
data is written to the attacker-controlled member device.
Reproducer (CONTROL/ATTACK, only bblog_size differs):
CONTROL bblog_size = 8 -> 4096 bytes land, out-of-range stays
at the fill pattern
ATTACK bblog_size = 0xFFFF -> 33553920 bytes land, KASAN reports
slab-out-of-bounds in
copy_folio_from_iter_atomic(), and
~33.5 MB of kernel memory is copied
into the member device image
The harness creates the on-disk superblock by hand, attaches the loop
device, binds it to a new md array via sysfs, adds one bad block, and
then writes "writemostly" to the member state attribute to force an
md_update_sb(). Both runs share the same kernel, the same md module and
the same code path; the only difference is the bblog_size field in the
on-disk superblock.
Patch 1 adds an upper bound for bb->size in super_1_sync(), matching
the existing guard in super_1_load().
Patch 2 is a defensive check in md_write_metadata() itself, so that
any future caller that passes an oversized length is caught before the
bio is built. Only one of the two is strictly needed to fix the
immediate issue; I'm sending both because the checks cover different
layers.
I can send the harness and full dmesg logs if useful.
Thanks.
zjamg (2):
md: fix bblog_size-driven OOB read in super_1_load() and
super_1_sync()
md: add defensive bounds check for bio in md_write_metadata()
drivers/md/md.c | 11 +++++++++--
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--
2.53.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-09-17 8:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-17 8:38 zjamg [this message]
2026-09-17 8:38 ` [PATCH 1/2] md: fix bblog_size-driven OOB read in super_1_load() and super_1_sync() zjamg
2026-09-17 8:38 ` [PATCH 2/2] md: add defensive bounds check for bio in md_write_metadata() zjamg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260917083820.57091-1-ndaugoing@gmail.com \
--to=ndaugoing@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magiclinan@didiglobal.com \
--cc=neil@brown.name \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=xiao@kernel.org \
--cc=yukuai@fygo.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®