CVE-2024-35784

MEDIUM
Published May 17, 2024 Modified Jan 10, 2025 CWE-667

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: fix deadlock with fiemap and extent locking While working on the patchset to remove extent locking I got a lockdep splat with fiemap and pagefaulting with my new extent lock replacement lock. This deadlock exists with our normal code, we just don't have lockdep annotations with the extent locking so we've never noticed it. Since we're copying the fiemap extent to user space on every iteration we have the chance of pagefaulting. Because we hold the extent lock for the entire range we could mkwrite into a range in the file that we have mmap'ed. This would deadlock with the following stack trace [<0>] lock_extent+0x28d/0x2f0 [<0>] btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x273/0x8a0 [<0>] do_page_mkwrite+0x50/0xb0 [<0>] do_fault+0xc1/0x7b0 [<0>] __handle_mm_fault+0x2fa/0x460 [<0>] handle_mm_fault+0xa4/0x330 [<0>] do_user_addr_fault+0x1f4/0x800 [<0>] exc_page_fault+0x7c/0x1e0 [<0>] asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30 [<0>] rep_movs_alternative+0x33/0x70 [<0>] _copy_to_user+0x49/0x70 [<0>] fiemap_fill_next_extent+0xc8/0x120 [<0>] emit_fiemap_extent+0x4d/0xa0 [<0>] extent_fiemap+0x7f8/0xad0 [<0>] btrfs_fiemap+0x49/0x80 [<0>] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x3e1/0xb50 [<0>] do_syscall_64+0x94/0x1a0 [<0>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0x76 I wrote an fstest to reproduce this deadlock without my replacement lock and verified that the deadlock exists with our existing locking. To fix this simply don't take the extent lock for the entire duration of the fiemap. This is safe in general because we keep track of where we are when we're searching the tree, so if an ordered extent updates in the middle of our fiemap call we'll still emit the correct extents because we know what offset we were on before. The only place we maintain the lock is searching delalloc. Since the delalloc stuff can change during writeback we want to lock the extent range so we have a consistent view of delalloc at the time we're checking to see if we need to set the delalloc flag. With this patch applied we no longer deadlock with my testcase.

Is your site exposed to CVE-2024-35784?

Run a free security scan — no signup, results in seconds.

CVSS v3.1 Score

5.5
MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Weakness Type (CWE)

CWE-667 CWE-667

Affected Products

Vendor Product
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2024-35784? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: fix deadlock with fiemap and extent locking While working on the patchset to remove extent locking I got a lockdep splat with fiemap and pagefaulting with my new extent lock replacement lock. This deadlock exists with our normal code, we just don't have lockdep annotations with the extent locking so we've never noticed it. Since we're copying the fiemap extent to user space on every iteration we have the chance of pagefaulting. Because we hold the extent lock for the entire range we could mkwrite into a range in the file that we have mmap'ed. This would deadlock with the following stack trace [<0>] lock_extent+0x28d/0x2f0 [<0>] btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x273/0x8a0 [<0>] do_page_mkwrite+0x50/0xb0 [<0>] do_fault+0xc1/0x7b0 [<0>] __handle_mm_fault+0x2fa/0x460 [<0>] handle_mm_fault+0xa4/0x330 [<0>] do_user_addr_fault+0x1f4/0x800 [<0>] exc_page_fault+0x7c/0x1e0 [<0>] asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30 [<0>] rep_movs_alternative+0x33/0x70 [<0>] _copy_to_user+0x49/0x70 [<0>] fiemap_fill_next_extent+0xc8/0x120 [<0>] emit_fiemap_extent+0x4d/0xa0 [<0>] extent_fiemap+0x7f8/0xad0 [<0>] btrfs_fiemap+0x49/0x80 [<0>] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x3e1/0xb50 [<0>] do_syscall_64+0x94/0x1a0 [<0>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0x76 I wrote an fstest to reproduce this deadlock without my replacement lock and verified that the deadlock exists with our existing locking. To fix this simply don't take the extent lock for the entire duration of the fiemap. This is safe in general because we keep track of where we are when we're searching the tree, so if an ordered extent updates in the middle of our fiemap call we'll still emit the correct extents because we know what offset we were on before. The only place we maintain the lock is searching delalloc. Since the delalloc stuff can change during writeback we want to lock the extent range so we have a consistent view of delalloc at the time we're checking to see if we need to set the delalloc flag. With this patch applied we no longer deadlock with my testcase. It has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.5 (MEDIUM).
How severe is CVE-2024-35784? +
CVE-2024-35784 has a CVSS v3.1 score of 5.5 out of 10, rated MEDIUM. This is a medium-severity vulnerability that should be remediated as part of regular maintenance.
What products are affected by CVE-2024-35784? +
CVE-2024-35784 affects products from linux, specifically: linux_kernel. Check the affected products table above for specific version ranges.
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2024-35784? +
You can use Secably's free Website Scanner to check your website for known vulnerabilities. For infrastructure scanning, use the Port Scanner to identify exposed services that may be affected. Check the vendor advisories linked above for specific patch and version information.

Related Vulnerabilities

Don't wait for an exploit

Scan your website for vulnerabilities like CVE-2024-35784 — free, no signup required.