From patchwork Fri Dec 22 15:12:41 2023 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Gui-Dong Han <2045gemini@gmail.com> X-Patchwork-Id: 13503450 Received: from mail-pj1-f54.google.com (mail-pj1-f54.google.com [209.85.216.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30CC828DBE; Fri, 22 Dec 2023 15:12:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="i+92oErG" Received: by mail-pj1-f54.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-28c1e079b20so151984a91.1; Fri, 22 Dec 2023 07:12:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1703257971; x=1703862771; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=mG5yQh5BmZ/+SdEVtHHTaLKN3jITKnFSk1eVPrGgKM0=; b=i+92oErG7BUf8YyMKD2pcuF4HgC/A1uevv2lIInkJySYQzbom0tr1lFXHzJWkVnpuP wb5YKZb5+yCYrGHUCJ4NN2j+r/1xUEH9YFu5nPdCRlVadeFX0e+FK+xXQnIlwLYHa8y+ px+iMM6H2bF+Bjar0ega0n3MZBpi4ByXuuG5d8ypXzhAzZfxCKAP4kK6pi613H48ZGQu fiYUTkPnqp6u9vX/7gXrBC5A2XzbytwehTbt672inygHtlLkSUVdLG9r8Fezr5n60nK/ +z4EXPpndQO5bOAGaOsIlaAf5d2N8HBfaMANLY3t8uyXsa5ho23V2tNTkwMcNEM+3BGx AcpA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1703257971; x=1703862771; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=mG5yQh5BmZ/+SdEVtHHTaLKN3jITKnFSk1eVPrGgKM0=; b=k4fbyWreSAn/Oz+FSsrTuru/O+fBaWwpFNhfg9bSJnnbx3z+lYTDZe9udp11KAF5QT k+lQXMPp9drOAO8VDjOnZYgI8zt+321g+zse/Nb2xFYkWqCH++ILkQl2+q43wh/PkZP7 8wSKUAIYVxJqB9XtYbZ4+xjpdkszYB2+bMmqT92DtRpk8zrABokyBx/cWIEgcZQgW4y/ jCOVvXc3T3ovAG98V4cuhxsUhITYGmaN1TRKeGTGwO/Rk16hpRxkgTlUOGqb0ala8vd+ b/ATdQ2NdLSEHX4Vu0Lrsm6Lgt9CJkw/D+HTRHyNWMyen72lUOWAWOwl+7JVTwiy0fth N70Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwAIRLt9SgVHUCh2dOZAaC0j/6Sg+74ja5vs9lLwhvn3OSDt9X0 VJSLSFI+3Zc8Cd8t+8mpLBE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEn6GnyGhoNKzdzJqZBh3Pzoaoc5HSi7iJzx80sJF+LA+cDrpsnrGtG92Oxvse40S35Oow6gw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:2dcf:b0:28c:4a7:b0da with SMTP id q15-20020a17090a2dcf00b0028c04a7b0damr846479pjm.86.1703257971300; Fri, 22 Dec 2023 07:12:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from g2039B650.. ([106.39.42.144]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id go18-20020a17090b03d200b0028c1807cbf0sm889333pjb.54.2023.12.22.07.12.47 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 22 Dec 2023 07:12:51 -0800 (PST) From: Gui-Dong Han <2045gemini@gmail.com> To: marcel@holtmann.org, johan.hedberg@gmail.com, luiz.dentz@gmail.com Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, baijiaju1990@outlook.com, Gui-Dong Han <2045gemini@gmail.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v2] Bluetooth: Fix atomicity violation in {min,max}_key_size_set Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 23:12:41 +0800 Message-Id: <20231222151241.4331-1-2045gemini@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In min_key_size_set(): if (val > hdev->le_max_key_size || val < SMP_MIN_ENC_KEY_SIZE) return -EINVAL; hci_dev_lock(hdev); hdev->le_min_key_size = val; hci_dev_unlock(hdev); In max_key_size_set(): if (val > SMP_MAX_ENC_KEY_SIZE || val < hdev->le_min_key_size) return -EINVAL; hci_dev_lock(hdev); hdev->le_max_key_size = val; hci_dev_unlock(hdev); The atomicity violation occurs due to concurrent execution of set_min and set_max funcs.Consider a scenario where setmin writes a new, valid 'min' value, and concurrently, setmax writes a value that is greater than the old 'min' but smaller than the new 'min'. In this case, setmax might check against the old 'min' value (before acquiring the lock) but write its value after the 'min' has been updated by setmin. This leads to a situation where the 'max' value ends up being smaller than the 'min' value, which is an inconsistency. This possible bug is found by an experimental static analysis tool developed by our team, BassCheck[1]. This tool analyzes the locking APIs to extract function pairs that can be concurrently executed, and then analyzes the instructions in the paired functions to identify possible concurrency bugs including data races and atomicity violations. The above possible bug is reported when our tool analyzes the source code of Linux 5.17. To resolve this issue, it is suggested to encompass the validity checks within the locked sections in both set_min and set_max funcs. The modification ensures that the validation of 'val' against the current min/max values is atomic, thus maintaining the integrity of the settings. With this patch applied, our tool no longer reports the bug, with the kernel configuration allyesconfig for x86_64. Due to the lack of associated hardware, we cannot test the patch in runtime testing, and just verify it according to the code logic. [1] https://sites.google.com/view/basscheck/ Fixes: 18f81241b74f ("Bluetooth: Move {min,max}_key_size debugfs ...") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Gui-Dong Han <2045gemini@gmail.com> --- v2: * Adjust the format to pass the CI. --- net/bluetooth/hci_debugfs.c | 16 ++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/bluetooth/hci_debugfs.c b/net/bluetooth/hci_debugfs.c index 6b7741f6e95b..3ffbf3f25363 100644 --- a/net/bluetooth/hci_debugfs.c +++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_debugfs.c @@ -1045,11 +1045,13 @@ DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE(adv_max_interval_fops, adv_max_interval_get, static int min_key_size_set(void *data, u64 val) { struct hci_dev *hdev = data; - - if (val > hdev->le_max_key_size || val < SMP_MIN_ENC_KEY_SIZE) + + hci_dev_lock(hdev); + if (val > hdev->le_max_key_size || val < SMP_MIN_ENC_KEY_SIZE) { + hci_dev_unlock(hdev); return -EINVAL; + } - hci_dev_lock(hdev); hdev->le_min_key_size = val; hci_dev_unlock(hdev); @@ -1073,11 +1075,13 @@ DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE(min_key_size_fops, min_key_size_get, static int max_key_size_set(void *data, u64 val) { struct hci_dev *hdev = data; - - if (val > SMP_MAX_ENC_KEY_SIZE || val < hdev->le_min_key_size) + + hci_dev_lock(hdev); + if (val > SMP_MAX_ENC_KEY_SIZE || val < hdev->le_min_key_size) { + hci_dev_unlock(hdev); return -EINVAL; + } - hci_dev_lock(hdev); hdev->le_max_key_size = val; hci_dev_unlock(hdev);