Re: Is xt_owner's owner_mt() racy with sock_orphan()? [worse with new TYPESAFE_BY_RCU file lifetime?]

[Phil Sutter]

 Hi,

On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 06:08:29PM +0100, Jann Horn wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 5:40 PM Jann Horn <jannh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > I think this code is racy, but testing that seems like a pain...
> >
> > owner_mt() in xt_owner runs in context of a NF_INET_LOCAL_OUT or
> > NF_INET_POST_ROUTING hook. It first checks that sk->sk_socket is
> > non-NULL, then checks that sk->sk_socket->file is non-NULL, then
> > accesses the ->f_cred of that file.
> >
> > I don't see anything that protects this against a concurrent
> > sock_orphan(), which NULLs out the sk->sk_socket pointer, if we're in
> 
> Ah, and all the other users of ->sk_socket in net/netfilter/ do it
> under the sk_callback_lock... so I guess the fix would be to add the
> same in owner_mt?

Sounds reasonable, although I wonder how likely a socket is to
orphan while netfilter is processing a packet it just sent.

How about the attached patch? Not sure what hash to put into a Fixes:
tag given this is a day 1 bug and ipt_owner/ip6t_owner predate git.

Thanks, Phil