A vulnerability was found in the Linux kernel's ext4 filesystem within the __ext4_fill_super() function, where uninitialized access to ratelimit_state->lock can occur, where the sysfs interface is registered before properly initializing rs->lock, potentially allowing other processes to modify rs->interval to a non-zero value.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ext4: fix uninitialized ratelimit_state->lock access in __ext4_fill_super()
In the following concurrency we will access the uninitialized rs->lock:
ext4_fill_super
ext4_register_sysfs
// sysfs registered msg_ratelimit_interval_ms
// Other processes modify rs->interval to
// non-zero via msg_ratelimit_interval_ms
ext4_orphan_cleanup
ext4_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, "Errors on filesystem, "
__ext4_msg
___ratelimit(&(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_msg_ratelimit_state)
if (!rs->interval) // do nothing if interval is 0
return 1;
raw_spin_trylock_irqsave(&rs->lock, flags)
raw_spin_trylock(lock)
_raw_spin_trylock
__raw_spin_trylock
spin_acquire(&lock->dep_map, 0, 1, _RET_IP_)
lock_acquire
__lock_acquire
register_lock_class
assign_lock_key
dump_stack();
ratelimit_state_init(&sbi->s_msg_ratelimit_state, 5 * HZ, 10);
raw_spin_lock_init(&rs->lock);
// init rs->lock here
and get the following dump_stack:
=========================================================
INFO: trying to register non-static key.
The code is fine but needs lockdep annotation, or maybe
you didn't initialize this object before use?
turning off the locking correctness validator.
CPU: 12 PID: 753 Comm: mount Tainted: G E 6.7.0-rc6-next-20231222 #504
[...]
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0xc5/0x170
dump_stack+0x18/0x30
register_lock_class+0x740/0x7c0
__lock_acquire+0x69/0x13a0
lock_acquire+0x120/0x450
_raw_spin_trylock+0x98/0xd0
___ratelimit+0xf6/0x220
__ext4_msg+0x7f/0x160 [ext4]
ext4_orphan_cleanup+0x665/0x740 [ext4]
__ext4_fill_super+0x21ea/0x2b10 [ext4]
ext4_fill_super+0x14d/0x360 [ext4]
[...]
=========================================================
Normally interval is 0 until s_msg_ratelimit_state is initialized, so
___ratelimit() does nothing. But registering sysfs precedes initializing
rs->lock, so it is possible to change rs->interval to a non-zero value
via the msg_ratelimit_interval_ms interface of sysfs while rs->lock is
uninitialized, and then a call to ext4_msg triggers the problem by
accessing an uninitialized rs->lock. Therefore register sysfs after all
initializations are complete to avoid such problems.
This issue has been addressed in the following products:
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Advanced Mission Critical Update Support
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Update Services for SAP Solutions
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Telecommunications Update Service
Via RHSA-2024:8616 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2024:8616
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: fix uninitialized ratelimit_state->lock access in __ext4_fill_super() In the following concurrency we will access the uninitialized rs->lock: ext4_fill_super ext4_register_sysfs // sysfs registered msg_ratelimit_interval_ms // Other processes modify rs->interval to // non-zero via msg_ratelimit_interval_ms ext4_orphan_cleanup ext4_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, "Errors on filesystem, " __ext4_msg ___ratelimit(&(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_msg_ratelimit_state) if (!rs->interval) // do nothing if interval is 0 return 1; raw_spin_trylock_irqsave(&rs->lock, flags) raw_spin_trylock(lock) _raw_spin_trylock __raw_spin_trylock spin_acquire(&lock->dep_map, 0, 1, _RET_IP_) lock_acquire __lock_acquire register_lock_class assign_lock_key dump_stack(); ratelimit_state_init(&sbi->s_msg_ratelimit_state, 5 * HZ, 10); raw_spin_lock_init(&rs->lock); // init rs->lock here and get the following dump_stack: ========================================================= INFO: trying to register non-static key. The code is fine but needs lockdep annotation, or maybe you didn't initialize this object before use? turning off the locking correctness validator. CPU: 12 PID: 753 Comm: mount Tainted: G E 6.7.0-rc6-next-20231222 #504 [...] Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0xc5/0x170 dump_stack+0x18/0x30 register_lock_class+0x740/0x7c0 __lock_acquire+0x69/0x13a0 lock_acquire+0x120/0x450 _raw_spin_trylock+0x98/0xd0 ___ratelimit+0xf6/0x220 __ext4_msg+0x7f/0x160 [ext4] ext4_orphan_cleanup+0x665/0x740 [ext4] __ext4_fill_super+0x21ea/0x2b10 [ext4] ext4_fill_super+0x14d/0x360 [ext4] [...] ========================================================= Normally interval is 0 until s_msg_ratelimit_state is initialized, so ___ratelimit() does nothing. But registering sysfs precedes initializing rs->lock, so it is possible to change rs->interval to a non-zero value via the msg_ratelimit_interval_ms interface of sysfs while rs->lock is uninitialized, and then a call to ext4_msg triggers the problem by accessing an uninitialized rs->lock. Therefore register sysfs after all initializations are complete to avoid such problems.