Re: Fwd: [PATCH][SMB3 client] fix TCP timers deadlock after rmmod

[Kuniyuki Iwashima]

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 16:18:37 +0100
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 05:15:44PM +0800, Wang Zhaolong wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 12:49:50PM +0800, Wang Zhaolong wrote:
> > > > Yes, it seems the previous description might not have been entirely clear.
> > > > I need to clearly point out that this patch, intended as the fix for CVE-2024-54680,
> > > > does not actually address any real issues. It also fails to resolve the null pointer
> > > > dereference problem within lockdep. On top of that, it has caused a series of
> > > > subsequent leakage issues.
> > > 
> > > If this cve does not actually fix anything, then we can easily reject
> > > it, please just let us know if that needs to happen here.
> > > 
> > > thanks,
> > > 
> > > greg k-h
> > Hi Greg,
> > 
> > Yes, I can confirm that the patch for CVE-2024-54680 (commit e9f2517a3e18)
> > should be rejected. Our analysis shows:
> > 
> > 1. It fails to address the actual null pointer dereference in lockdep
> > 
> > 2. It introduces multiple serious issues:
> >    1. A socket leak vulnerability as documented in bugzilla #219972
> >    2. Network namespace refcount imbalance issues as described in
> >      bugzilla #219792 (which required the follow-up mainline fix
> >      4e7f1644f2ac "smb: client: Fix netns refcount imbalance
> >      causing leaks and use-after-free")
> > 
> > The next thing we should probably do is:
> >    - Reverting e9f2517a3e18
> >    - Reverting the follow-up fix 4e7f1644f2ac, as it's trying to fix
> >      problems introduced by the problematic CVE patch
> 
> Great, can you please send patches now for both of these so we can
> backport them to the stable kernels properly?

Sent to CIFS tree:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cifs/20250402200319.2834-1-kuniyu@xxxxxxxxxx/

Thanks!