From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: "Xie, Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] vhost: avoid buffer overflow in update_secure_len
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 13:51:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151119055105.GI2326@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B4B198A75@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:15:25AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote:
> On 11/18/2015 4:47 PM, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 07:53:24AM +0000, Xie, Huawei wrote:
> > ...
> >>> do {
> >>> + if (vec_id >= BUF_VECTOR_MAX)
> >>> + break;
> >>> +
> >>> next_desc = 0;
> >>> len += vq->desc[idx].len;
> >>> vq->buf_vec[vec_id].buf_addr = vq->desc[idx].addr;
> >>> @@ -519,6 +526,8 @@ virtio_dev_merge_rx(struct virtio_net *dev, uint16_t queue_id,
> >>> goto merge_rx_exit;
> >>> } else {
> >>> update_secure_len(vq, res_cur_idx, &secure_len, &vec_idx);
> >>> + if (secure_len == 0)
> >>> + goto merge_rx_exit;
> >> Why do we exit when secure_len is 0 rather than 1? :). Malicious guest
> > I confess it's not a proper fix. Making it return an error code, as Rich
> > suggested in early email, is better. It's generic enough, as we have to
> > check the vec_buf overflow here.
> >
> > BTW, can we move the vec_buf outside `struct vhost_virtqueue'? It makes
> > the structure huge.
> >
> >> could easily forge the desc len so that secure_len never reach pkt_len
> >> even it is not zero so that host enters into dead loop here.
> >> Generally speaking, we shouldn't fix for a specific issue,
> > Agreed.
> >
> >> and the
> >> security checks should be as few as possible.
> > Idealy, yes.
> >
> >> We need to consider
> >> refactor the code here for the generic fix.
> > What's your thougths?
> Maybe we merge the update_secure_len with the outside loop into a simple
> inline function, in which we consider both the max vector number and
> desc count to avoid trapped into dead loop. This functions returns a buf
> vec with which we could copy securely afterwards.
I agree that grouping them into a function makes the logic clearer, and
hence less error-prone.
I made a quick try. Comments?
--yliu
---
diff --git a/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_rxtx.c b/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_rxtx.c
index 4fc35d1..e270fb1 100644
--- a/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_rxtx.c
+++ b/lib/librte_vhost/vhost_rxtx.c
@@ -439,32 +439,98 @@ copy_from_mbuf_to_vring(struct virtio_net *dev, uint32_t queue_id,
return entry_success;
}
-static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
-update_secure_len(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq, uint32_t id,
- uint32_t *secure_len, uint32_t *vec_idx)
+static inline int
+fill_vec_buf(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq, uint32_t avail_idx,
+ uint32_t *allocated, uint32_t *vec_idx)
{
- uint16_t wrapped_idx = id & (vq->size - 1);
- uint32_t idx = vq->avail->ring[wrapped_idx];
- uint8_t next_desc;
- uint32_t len = *secure_len;
+ uint16_t idx = vq->avail->ring[avail_idx & (vq->size - 1)];
uint32_t vec_id = *vec_idx;
+ uint32_t len = *allocated;
+
+ while (1) {
+ if (vec_id >= BUF_VECTOR_MAX)
+ return -1;
- do {
- next_desc = 0;
len += vq->desc[idx].len;
vq->buf_vec[vec_id].buf_addr = vq->desc[idx].addr;
vq->buf_vec[vec_id].buf_len = vq->desc[idx].len;
vq->buf_vec[vec_id].desc_idx = idx;
vec_id++;
- if (vq->desc[idx].flags & VRING_DESC_F_NEXT) {
- idx = vq->desc[idx].next;
- next_desc = 1;
+ if ((vq->desc[idx].flags & VRING_DESC_F_NEXT) == 0)
+ break;
+
+ idx = vq->desc[idx].next;
+ }
+
+ *allocated = len;
+ *vec_idx = vec_id;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+/*
+ * As many data cores may want to access available buffers concurrently,
+ * they need to be reserved.
+ *
+ * Returns -1 on fail, 0 on success
+ */
+static inline int
+reserve_avail_buf(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq, uint32_t size,
+ uint16_t *start, uint16_t *end)
+{
+ uint16_t res_base_idx;
+ uint16_t res_cur_idx;
+ uint16_t avail_idx;
+ uint32_t allocated;
+ uint32_t vec_idx;
+ uint16_t tries;
+
+again:
+ res_base_idx = vq->last_used_idx_res;
+ res_cur_idx = res_base_idx;
+
+ allocated = 0;
+ vec_idx = 0;
+ tries = 0;
+ while (1) {
+ avail_idx = *((volatile uint16_t *)&vq->avail->idx);
+ if (unlikely(res_cur_idx == avail_idx)) {
+ LOG_DEBUG(VHOST_DATA, "(%"PRIu64") Failed "
+ "to get enough desc from vring\n",
+ dev->device_fh);
+ return -1;
}
- } while (next_desc);
- *secure_len = len;
- *vec_idx = vec_id;
+ if (fill_vec_buf(vq, res_cur_idx, &allocated, &vec_idx) < 0)
+ return -1;
+
+ res_cur_idx++;
+ tries++;
+
+ if (allocated >= size)
+ break;
+
+ /*
+ * if we tried all available ring items, and still
+ * can't get enough buf, it means something abnormal
+ * happened.
+ */
+ if (tries >= vq->size)
+ return -1;
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * update vq->last_used_idx_res atomically.
+ * retry again if failed.
+ */
+ if (rte_atomic16_cmpset(&vq->last_used_idx_res,
+ res_base_idx, res_cur_idx) == 0)
+ goto again;
+
+ *start = res_base_idx;
+ *end = res_cur_idx;
+ return 0;
}
/*
@@ -476,9 +542,7 @@ virtio_dev_merge_rx(struct virtio_net *dev, uint16_t queue_id,
{
struct vhost_virtqueue *vq;
uint32_t pkt_idx = 0, entry_success = 0;
- uint16_t avail_idx;
- uint16_t res_base_idx, res_cur_idx;
- uint8_t success = 0;
+ uint16_t start, end;
LOG_DEBUG(VHOST_DATA, "(%"PRIu64") virtio_dev_merge_rx()\n",
dev->device_fh);
@@ -501,40 +565,11 @@ virtio_dev_merge_rx(struct virtio_net *dev, uint16_t queue_id,
for (pkt_idx = 0; pkt_idx < count; pkt_idx++) {
uint32_t pkt_len = pkts[pkt_idx]->pkt_len + vq->vhost_hlen;
- do {
- /*
- * As many data cores may want access to available
- * buffers, they need to be reserved.
- */
- uint32_t secure_len = 0;
- uint32_t vec_idx = 0;
-
- res_base_idx = vq->last_used_idx_res;
- res_cur_idx = res_base_idx;
-
- do {
- avail_idx = *((volatile uint16_t *)&vq->avail->idx);
- if (unlikely(res_cur_idx == avail_idx)) {
- LOG_DEBUG(VHOST_DATA,
- "(%"PRIu64") Failed "
- "to get enough desc from "
- "vring\n",
- dev->device_fh);
- goto merge_rx_exit;
- } else {
- update_secure_len(vq, res_cur_idx, &secure_len, &vec_idx);
- res_cur_idx++;
- }
- } while (pkt_len > secure_len);
-
- /* vq->last_used_idx_res is atomically updated. */
- success = rte_atomic16_cmpset(&vq->last_used_idx_res,
- res_base_idx,
- res_cur_idx);
- } while (success == 0);
+ if (reserve_avail_buf(vq, pkt_len, &start, &end) < 0)
+ break;
entry_success = copy_from_mbuf_to_vring(dev, queue_id,
- res_base_idx, res_cur_idx, pkts[pkt_idx]);
+ start, end, pkts[pkt_idx]);
rte_compiler_barrier();
@@ -542,14 +577,13 @@ virtio_dev_merge_rx(struct virtio_net *dev, uint16_t queue_id,
* Wait until it's our turn to add our buffer
* to the used ring.
*/
- while (unlikely(vq->last_used_idx != res_base_idx))
+ while (unlikely(vq->last_used_idx != start))
rte_pause();
*(volatile uint16_t *)&vq->used->idx += entry_success;
- vq->last_used_idx = res_cur_idx;
+ vq->last_used_idx = end;
}
-merge_rx_exit:
if (likely(pkt_idx)) {
/* flush used->idx update before we read avail->flags. */
rte_mb();
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-19 5:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-12 8:02 Rich Lane
2015-11-12 9:23 ` Yuanhan Liu
2015-11-12 21:46 ` Rich Lane
2015-11-17 13:23 ` Yuanhan Liu
2015-11-17 16:39 ` Rich Lane
2015-11-18 2:56 ` Yuanhan Liu
2015-11-18 5:23 ` Wang, Zhihong
2015-11-18 5:26 ` Rich Lane
2015-11-18 5:32 ` Yuanhan Liu
2015-11-18 6:13 ` Xie, Huawei
2015-11-18 6:25 ` Yuanhan Liu
2015-11-18 8:13 ` Xie, Huawei
2015-11-18 15:53 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-11-18 16:00 ` Xie, Huawei
2015-11-18 7:53 ` Xie, Huawei
2015-11-18 8:48 ` Yuanhan Liu
2015-11-18 11:15 ` Xie, Huawei
2015-11-19 5:51 ` Yuanhan Liu [this message]
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=20151119055105.GI2326@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com \
--to=yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=huawei.xie@intel.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).