netfilter: nf_ct_ext: fix possible panic after nf_ct_extend_unregister
commit 9c3f3794 upstream. If one cpu is doing nf_ct_extend_unregister while another cpu is doing __nf_ct_ext_add_length, then we may hit BUG_ON(t == NULL). Moreover, there's no synchronize_rcu invocation after set nf_ct_ext_types[id] to NULL, so it's possible that we may access invalid pointer. But actually, most of the ct extends are built-in, so the problem listed above will not happen. However, there are two exceptions: NF_CT_EXT_NAT and NF_CT_EXT_SYNPROXY. For _EXT_NAT, the panic will not happen, since adding the nat extend and unregistering the nat extend are located in the same file(nf_nat_core.c), this means that after the nat module is removed, we cannot add the nat extend too. For _EXT_SYNPROXY, synproxy extend may be added by init_conntrack, while synproxy extend unregister will be done by synproxy_core_exit. So after nf_synproxy_core.ko is removed, we may still try to add the synproxy extend, then kernel panic may happen. I know it's very hard to reproduce this issue, but I can play a tricky game to make it happen very easily :) Step 1. Enable SYNPROXY for tcp dport 1234 at FORWARD hook: # iptables -I FORWARD -p tcp --dport 1234 -j SYNPROXY Step 2. Queue the syn packet to the userspace at raw table OUTPUT hook. Also note, in the userspace we only add a 20s' delay, then reinject the syn packet to the kernel: # iptables -t raw -I OUTPUT -p tcp --syn -j NFQUEUE --queue-num 1 Step 3. Using "nc 2.2.2.2 1234" to connect the server. Step 4. Now remove the nf_synproxy_core.ko quickly: # iptables -F FORWARD # rmmod ipt_SYNPROXY # rmmod nf_synproxy_core Step 5. After 20s' delay, the syn packet is reinjected to the kernel. Now you will see the panic like this: kernel BUG at net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_extend.c:91! Call Trace: ? __nf_ct_ext_add_length+0x53/0x3c0 [nf_conntrack] init_conntrack+0x12b/0x600 [nf_conntrack] nf_conntrack_in+0x4cc/0x580 [nf_conntrack] ipv4_conntrack_local+0x48/0x50 [nf_conntrack_ipv4] nf_reinject+0x104/0x270 nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x3e1/0x5f9 [nfnetlink_queue] ? nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x5/0x5f9 [nfnetlink_queue] ? nla_parse+0xa0/0x100 nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x175/0x6a9 [nfnetlink] [...] One possible solution is to make NF_CT_EXT_SYNPROXY extend built-in, i.e. introduce nf_conntrack_synproxy.c and only do ct extend register and unregister in it, similar to nf_conntrack_timeout.c. But having such a obscure restriction of nf_ct_extend_unregister is not a good idea, so we should invoke synchronize_rcu after set nf_ct_ext_types to NULL, and check the NULL pointer when do __nf_ct_ext_add_length. Then it will be easier if we add new ct extend in the future. Last, we use kfree_rcu to free nf_ct_ext, so rcu_barrier() is unnecessary anymore, remove it too. Signed-off-by: Liping Zhang <zlpnobody@gmail.com> Acked-by: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> Cc: Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@canonical.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment