Commit 1abd165e authored by Daniel Borkmann's avatar Daniel Borkmann Committed by David S. Miller

net: sctp: fix NULL pointer dereference in socket destruction

While stress testing sctp sockets, I hit the following panic:

BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000020
IP: [<ffffffffa0490c4e>] sctp_endpoint_free+0xe/0x40 [sctp]
PGD 7cead067 PUD 7ce76067 PMD 0
Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP
Modules linked in: sctp(F) libcrc32c(F) [...]
CPU: 7 PID: 2950 Comm: acc Tainted: GF            3.10.0-rc2+ #1
Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge T410/0H19HD, BIOS 1.6.3 02/01/2011
task: ffff88007ce0e0c0 ti: ffff88007b568000 task.ti: ffff88007b568000
RIP: 0010:[<ffffffffa0490c4e>]  [<ffffffffa0490c4e>] sctp_endpoint_free+0xe/0x40 [sctp]
RSP: 0018:ffff88007b569e08  EFLAGS: 00010292
RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff88007db78a00 RCX: dead000000200200
RDX: ffffffffa049fdb0 RSI: ffff8800379baf38 RDI: 0000000000000000
RBP: ffff88007b569e18 R08: ffff88007c230da0 R09: 0000000000000001
R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000000
R13: ffff880077990d00 R14: 0000000000000084 R15: ffff88007db78a00
FS:  00007fc18ab61700(0000) GS:ffff88007fc60000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 000000008005003b
CR2: 0000000000000020 CR3: 000000007cf9d000 CR4: 00000000000007e0
DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
 ffff88007b569e38 ffff88007db78a00 ffff88007b569e38 ffffffffa049fded
 ffffffff81abf0c0 ffff88007db78a00 ffff88007b569e58 ffffffff8145b60e
 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ffff88007b569eb8 ffffffff814df36e
Call Trace:
 [<ffffffffa049fded>] sctp_destroy_sock+0x3d/0x80 [sctp]
 [<ffffffff8145b60e>] sk_common_release+0x1e/0xf0
 [<ffffffff814df36e>] inet_create+0x2ae/0x350
 [<ffffffff81455a6f>] __sock_create+0x11f/0x240
 [<ffffffff81455bf0>] sock_create+0x30/0x40
 [<ffffffff8145696c>] SyS_socket+0x4c/0xc0
 [<ffffffff815403be>] ? do_page_fault+0xe/0x10
 [<ffffffff8153cb32>] ? page_fault+0x22/0x30
 [<ffffffff81544e02>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
Code: 0c c9 c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 e8 fb fe ff ff c9 c3 66 0f
      1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 55 48 89 e5 53 48 83 ec 08 66 66 66 66 90 <48>
      8b 47 20 48 89 fb c6 47 1c 01 c6 40 12 07 e8 9e 68 01 00 48
RIP  [<ffffffffa0490c4e>] sctp_endpoint_free+0xe/0x40 [sctp]
 RSP <ffff88007b569e08>
CR2: 0000000000000020
---[ end trace e0d71ec1108c1dd9 ]---

I did not hit this with the lksctp-tools functional tests, but with a
small, multi-threaded test program, that heavily allocates, binds,
listens and waits in accept on sctp sockets, and then randomly kills
some of them (no need for an actual client in this case to hit this).
Then, again, allocating, binding, etc, and then killing child processes.

This panic then only occurs when ``echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/sctp/auth_enable''
is set. The cause for that is actually very simple: in sctp_endpoint_init()
we enter the path of sctp_auth_init_hmacs(). There, we try to allocate
our crypto transforms through crypto_alloc_hash(). In our scenario,
it then can happen that crypto_alloc_hash() fails with -EINTR from
crypto_larval_wait(), thus we bail out and release the socket via
sk_common_release(), sctp_destroy_sock() and hit the NULL pointer
dereference as soon as we try to access members in the endpoint during
sctp_endpoint_free(), since endpoint at that time is still NULL. Now,
if we have that case, we do not need to do any cleanup work and just
leave the destruction handler.
Signed-off-by: default avatarDaniel Borkmann <>
Acked-by: default avatarNeil Horman <>
Acked-by: default avatarVlad Yasevich <>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <>
parent 288cfe78
......@@ -4003,6 +4003,12 @@ SCTP_STATIC void sctp_destroy_sock(struct sock *sk)
/* Release our hold on the endpoint. */
sp = sctp_sk(sk);
/* This could happen during socket init, thus we bail out
* early, since the rest of the below is not setup either.
if (sp->ep == NULL)
if (sp->do_auto_asconf) {
sp->do_auto_asconf = 0;
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment