From: "Sönke Huster" <soenke.huster@eknoes.de>
To: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@gmail.com>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
"linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_event: Ignore multiple conn complete events
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2022 00:52:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5d83dba0-2283-ef9d-e8f7-82e6628d4263@eknoes.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABBYNZJx+UzHLRA8o=z-fkiHAmBJ6-WtY35eJtD6C6N6PhLbDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Luiz,
On 22.01.22 00:32, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
> Hi Sönke,
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 3:18 PM Sönke Huster <soenke.huster@eknoes.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Luiz,
>>
>> On 21.01.22 22:31, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
>>> Hi Sönke,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 10:22 AM Sönke Huster <soenke.huster@eknoes.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I just noticed that just checking for handle does not work, as obviously 0x0 could also be a handle value and therefore it can't be distinguished, whether it is not set yet or it is 0x0.
>>>
>>> Yep, we should probably check its state, check for state != BT_OPEN
>>> since that is what hci_conn_add initialize the state.
>>>
>>
>> I thought there are more valid connection states for the first HCI_CONNECTION_COMPLETE event, as it also occurs e.g. after an HCI_Create_Connection command, see Core 5.3 p.2170:
>>> This event also indicates to the Host which issued the HCI_Create_Connection, HCI_Accept_-
>>> Connection_Request, or HCI_Reject_Connection_Request command, and
>>> then received an HCI_Command_Status event, if the issued command failed or
>>> was successful.
>>
>> For example in hci_conn.c hci_acl_create_connection (which triggers a HCI_Create_Connection command as far as I understand), the state of the connection is changed to BT_CONNECT or BT_CONNECT2.
>> But as I am quite new in the (Linux) Bluetooth world, I might have a wrong understanding of that.
>
> Yep, we would probably need a switch to capture which states are valid
> and which are not or we initialize the handle with something outside
> of the valid range of handles (0x0000 to 0x0EFF) so we can initialize
> it to e.g. 0xffff (using something like define HCI_CONN_HANDLE_UNSET)
> so we can really tell when it has been set or not.
>
I think the state switch is just possible if there is no possibility
to change a connection state back into one of the accepted states.
Unless changing the state back into an accepted state includes a call
to "hci_conn_del_sysfs", as the real issue when getting a duplicate
HCI_Create_Connection event is that device_add in hci_conn_add_sysfs
is called twice for the same connection.
There might be other issues as well in processing a duplicate event,
but as far as I can see the bugs I trigger rely on multiple calls to
device_add which lead in the long run to multiple user-after frees
or null-pointer derefs. I tried to write that up in the bugzilla report
here: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215497
When using something like HCI_CONN_HANDLE_UNSET, we need to make sure
that everywhere where we receive a handle from an event and use it to
set conn->handle, it is a valid one. Otherwise a hacked / malicious
controller would just send multiple events for the invalid handle.
What solution do you prefer? If you don't mind I'd like to try to
create a patch.
>>>> On 21.01.22 18:36, Soenke Huster wrote:
>>>>> When a HCI_CONNECTION_COMPLETE event is received multiple times
>>>>> for the same handle, the device is registered multiple times which leads
>>>>> to memory corruptions. Therefore, consequent events for a single
>>>>> connection are ignored.
>>>>>
>>>>> The conn->state can hold different values so conn->handle is
>>>>> checked to detect whether a connection is already set up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Buglink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215497
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Soenke Huster <soenke.huster@eknoes.de>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> This fixes the referenced bug and several use-after-free issues I discovered.
>>>>> I tagged it as RFC, as I am not 100% sure if checking the existence of the
>>>>> handle is the correct approach, but to the best of my knowledge it must be
>>>>> set for the first time in this function for valid connections of this event,
>>>>> therefore it should be fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> net/bluetooth/hci_event.c | 11 +++++++++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
>>>>> index 681c623aa380..71ccb12c928d 100644
>>>>> --- a/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
>>>>> +++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_event.c
>>>>> @@ -3106,6 +3106,17 @@ static void hci_conn_complete_evt(struct hci_dev *hdev, void *data,
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> + /* The HCI_Connection_Complete event is only sent once per connection.
>>>>> + * Processing it more than once per connection can corrupt kernel memory.
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * As the connection handle is set here for the first time, it indicates
>>>>> + * whether the connection is already set up.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if (conn->handle) {
>>>>> + bt_dev_err(hdev, "Ignoring HCI_Connection_Complete for existing connection");
>>>>> + goto unlock;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> if (!ev->status) {
>>>>> conn->handle = __le16_to_cpu(ev->handle);
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Best
>> Sönke
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-21 23:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-21 17:36 Soenke Huster
2022-01-21 18:22 ` Sönke Huster
2022-01-21 21:31 ` Luiz Augusto von Dentz
2022-01-21 23:18 ` Sönke Huster
2022-01-21 23:32 ` Luiz Augusto von Dentz
2022-01-21 23:52 ` Sönke Huster [this message]
2022-01-22 0:06 ` Luiz Augusto von Dentz
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=5d83dba0-2283-ef9d-e8f7-82e6628d4263@eknoes.de \
--to=soenke.huster@eknoes.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=johan.hedberg@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luiz.dentz@gmail.com \
--cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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®