[PATCH OLK-5.10 0/2] net: xfrm: Fix CVE-2025-39797
Fix CVE-2025-39797 Aakash Kumar S (1): xfrm: Duplicate SPI Handling Sabrina Dubroca (1): xfrm: xfrm_alloc_spi shouldn't use 0 as SPI net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c | 70 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) -- 2.25.1
From: Aakash Kumar S <saakashkumar@marvell.com> mainline inclusion from mainline-v6.17-rc1 commit 94f39804d891cffe4ce17737d295f3b195bc7299 category: bugfix bugzilla: https://atomgit.com/src-openeuler/kernel/issues/12409 CVE: CVE-2025-39797 Reference: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i... -------------------------------- The issue originates when Strongswan initiates an XFRM_MSG_ALLOCSPI Netlink message, which triggers the kernel function xfrm_alloc_spi(). This function is expected to ensure uniqueness of the Security Parameter Index (SPI) for inbound Security Associations (SAs). However, it can return success even when the requested SPI is already in use, leading to duplicate SPIs assigned to multiple inbound SAs, differentiated only by their destination addresses. This behavior causes inconsistencies during SPI lookups for inbound packets. Since the lookup may return an arbitrary SA among those with the same SPI, packet processing can fail, resulting in packet drops. According to RFC 4301 section 4.4.2 , for inbound processing a unicast SA is uniquely identified by the SPI and optionally protocol. Reproducing the Issue Reliably: To consistently reproduce the problem, restrict the available SPI range in charon.conf : spi_min = 0x10000000 spi_max = 0x10000002 This limits the system to only 2 usable SPI values. Next, create more than 2 Child SA. each using unique pair of src/dst address. As soon as the 3rd Child SA is initiated, it will be assigned a duplicate SPI, since the SPI pool is already exhausted. With a narrow SPI range, the issue is consistently reproducible. With a broader/default range, it becomes rare and unpredictable. Current implementation: xfrm_spi_hash() lookup function computes hash using daddr, proto, and family. So if two SAs have the same SPI but different destination addresses, then they will: a. Hash into different buckets b. Be stored in different linked lists (byspi + h) c. Not be seen in the same hlist_for_each_entry_rcu() iteration. As a result, the lookup will result in NULL and kernel allows that Duplicate SPI Proposed Change: xfrm_state_lookup_spi_proto() does a truly global search - across all states, regardless of hash bucket and matches SPI and proto. Signed-off-by: Aakash Kumar S <saakashkumar@marvell.com> Acked-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com> Conflicts: net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c [commit c2dad11e0466 and e8a533cbeb79 are not backport] Signed-off-by: Dong Chenchen <dongchenchen2@huawei.com> --- net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c index b826e1a5f572..10f05624e244 100644 --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c @@ -1282,6 +1282,26 @@ struct xfrm_state *xfrm_state_lookup_byspi(struct net *net, __be32 spi, } EXPORT_SYMBOL(xfrm_state_lookup_byspi); +static struct xfrm_state *xfrm_state_lookup_spi_proto(struct net *net, __be32 spi, u8 proto) +{ + struct xfrm_state *x; + unsigned int i; + + rcu_read_lock(); + for (i = 0; i <= net->xfrm.state_hmask; i++) { + hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(x, &net->xfrm.state_byspi[i], byspi) { + if (x->id.spi == spi && x->id.proto == proto) { + if (!xfrm_state_hold_rcu(x)) + continue; + rcu_read_unlock(); + return x; + } + } + } + rcu_read_unlock(); + return NULL; +} + static void __xfrm_state_insert(struct xfrm_state *x) { struct net *net = xs_net(x); @@ -2058,10 +2078,8 @@ int xfrm_alloc_spi(struct xfrm_state *x, u32 low, u32 high) unsigned int h; struct xfrm_state *x0; int err = -ENOENT; - __be32 minspi = htonl(low); - __be32 maxspi = htonl(high); + u32 range = high - low + 1; __be32 newspi = 0; - u32 mark = x->mark.v & x->mark.m; spin_lock_bh(&x->lock); if (x->km.state == XFRM_STATE_DEAD) @@ -2073,33 +2091,30 @@ int xfrm_alloc_spi(struct xfrm_state *x, u32 low, u32 high) err = -ENOENT; - if (minspi == maxspi) { - x0 = xfrm_state_lookup(net, mark, &x->id.daddr, minspi, x->id.proto, x->props.family); - if (x0) { - xfrm_state_put(x0); + for (h = 0; h < range; h++) { + u32 spi = (low == high) ? low : low + prandom_u32() % (high - low + 1); + newspi = htonl(spi); + + spin_lock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock); + x0 = xfrm_state_lookup_spi_proto(net, newspi, x->id.proto); + if (!x0) { + x->id.spi = newspi; + h = xfrm_spi_hash(net, &x->id.daddr, newspi, x->id.proto, x->props.family); + hlist_add_head_rcu(&x->byspi, net->xfrm.state_byspi + h); + spin_unlock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock); + err = 0; goto unlock; } - newspi = minspi; - } else { - u32 spi = 0; - for (h = 0; h < high-low+1; h++) { - spi = low + prandom_u32()%(high-low+1); - x0 = xfrm_state_lookup(net, mark, &x->id.daddr, htonl(spi), x->id.proto, x->props.family); - if (x0 == NULL) { - newspi = htonl(spi); - break; - } - xfrm_state_put(x0); - } - } - if (newspi) { - spin_lock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock); - x->id.spi = newspi; - h = xfrm_spi_hash(net, &x->id.daddr, x->id.spi, x->id.proto, x->props.family); - hlist_add_head_rcu(&x->byspi, net->xfrm.state_byspi + h); + xfrm_state_put(x0); spin_unlock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock); - err = 0; + if (signal_pending(current)) { + err = -ERESTARTSYS; + goto unlock; + } + + if (low == high) + break; } unlock: -- 2.25.1
From: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@queasysnail.net> mainline inclusion from mainline-v6.17 commit cd8ae32e4e4652db55bce6b9c79267d8946765a9 category: bugfix bugzilla: https://atomgit.com/src-openeuler/kernel/issues/12409 CVE: CVE-2025-39797 Reference: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i... -------------------------------- x->id.spi == 0 means "no SPI assigned", but since commit 94f39804d891 ("xfrm: Duplicate SPI Handling"), we now create states and add them to the byspi list with this value. __xfrm_state_delete doesn't remove those states from the byspi list, since they shouldn't be there, and this shows up as a UAF the next time we go through the byspi list. Reported-by: syzbot+a25ee9d20d31e483ba7b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a25ee9d20d31e483ba7b Fixes: 94f39804d891 ("xfrm: Duplicate SPI Handling") Signed-off-by: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@queasysnail.net> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com> Conflicts: net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c [conflicts due to merged 3ef7f75526f2 ("[Backport] xfrm: Duplicate SPI Handling")] Signed-off-by: Dong Chenchen <dongchenchen2@huawei.com> --- net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c index 10f05624e244..3d6694a06534 100644 --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c @@ -2093,6 +2093,8 @@ int xfrm_alloc_spi(struct xfrm_state *x, u32 low, u32 high) for (h = 0; h < range; h++) { u32 spi = (low == high) ? low : low + prandom_u32() % (high - low + 1); + if (spi == 0) + goto next; newspi = htonl(spi); spin_lock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock); @@ -2108,6 +2110,7 @@ int xfrm_alloc_spi(struct xfrm_state *x, u32 low, u32 high) xfrm_state_put(x0); spin_unlock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock); +next: if (signal_pending(current)) { err = -ERESTARTSYS; goto unlock; -- 2.25.1
反馈: 您发送到kernel@openeuler.org的补丁/补丁集,已成功转换为PR! PR链接地址: https://atomgit.com/openeuler/kernel/merge_requests/20408 邮件列表地址:https://mailweb.openeuler.org/archives/list/kernel@openeuler.org/message/OOP... FeedBack: The patch(es) which you have sent to kernel@openeuler.org mailing list has been converted to a pull request successfully! Pull request link: https://atomgit.com/openeuler/kernel/merge_requests/20408 Mailing list address: https://mailweb.openeuler.org/archives/list/kernel@openeuler.org/message/OOP...
participants (2)
-
Dong Chenchen -
patchwork bot