fs: fix possible Spectre V1 indexing in __close_fd()
Subsystems (2)
PATCH v2 1/1 fs: fix possible Spectre V1 indexing in __close_fd()
Omer Tripp's analysis of a Spectre V1 gadget in __close_fd():
"1. __close_fd() is reachable via the close() syscall with a
user-controlled fd.
2. If said bounds check is mispredicted, then a user-controlled address fdt->fd[fd] is obtained then dereferenced, and the value of a user-controlled address is loaded into the local variable file.
3. file is then passed as an argument to filp_close, where the cache lines secret + offsetof(f_op) and secret + offsetof(f_mode) are hot and vulnerable to a timing channel attack."
Address this by using array_index_nospec() to prevent speculation past the end of current->fdt.
---
v2: include Omer Tripp's analysis in commit message, and update my email
address
fs/file.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
fs/file.c +2 -0
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@#include <linux/bitops.h> #include <linux/spinlock.h> #include <linux/rcupdate.h> +#include <linux/nospec.h> unsigned int sysctl_nr_open__read_mostly =1024 *1024 ;unsigned int sysctl_nr_open_min =BITS_PER_LONG ;
@@ -626,6 +627,7 @@ int __close_fd(struct files_struct *files, unsigned fd) fdt =files_fdtable (files);if (fd >= fdt->max_fds) goto out_unlock; + fd =array_index_nospec (fd, fdt->max_fds); file = fdt->fd[fd];if (!file) goto out_unlock;
Signature · 1 line
2.19.1
Quoted 10 lines · Greg Hackmann
+++
b/fs/file.cfs/file.c +1
-0@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@#include <linux/bitops.h> #include <linux/spinlock.h> #include <linux/rcupdate.h> +#include <linux/nospec.h> unsigned int sysctl_nr_open__read_mostly =1024 *1024 ;unsigned int sysctl_nr_open_min =BITS_PER_LONG ;
fs/file.c int __close_fd(struct files_struct *files, unsigned fd) · line 633
Quoted 7 lines
fs/file.c +1
-0@@ -626,6 +627,7 @@ int __close_fd(struct files_struct *files, unsigned fd) fdt =files_fdtable (files);if (fd >= fdt->max_fds) goto out_unlock; + fd =array_index_nospec (fd, fdt->max_fds); file = fdt->fd[fd];if (!file) goto out_unlock;
This is insufficient. do_dup2() has a similar problem.