🇰🇷 한글 설명
리눅스 커널의 net: phy 계층에서 발생한 교착 상태(Deadlock) 취약점입니다. 특정 상황에서 두 개의 서로 다른 잠금(Lock)이 서로를 기다리는 순환 의존성(AB/BA)이 발생하여 시스템이 멈출 수 있습니다.
💡 쉬운 설명
컴퓨터의 네트워크 장치를 관리하는 과정에서 두 작업이 서로의 차례를 기다리며 무한히 대기하는 상황이 발생할 수 있습니다. 이로 인해 시스템이 응답하지 않고 멈추는 현상이 나타날 수 있습니다.
🇺🇸 원문 (English)
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: phy: transfer phy_config_inband() locking responsibility to phylink
Problem description
===================
Lockdep reports a possible circular locking dependency (AB/BA) between
&pl->state_mutex and &phy->lock, as follows.
phylink_resolve() // acquires &pl->state_mutex
-> phylink_major_config()
-> phy_config_inband() // acquires &pl->phydev->lock
whereas all the other call sites where &pl->state_mutex and
&pl->phydev->lock have the locking scheme reversed. Everywhere else,
&pl->phydev->lock is acquired at the top level, and &pl->state_mutex at
the lower level. A clear example is phylink_bringup_phy().
The outlier is the newly introduced phy_config_inband() and the existing
lock order is the correct one. To understand why it cannot be the other
way around, it is sufficient to consider phylink_phy_change(), phylink's
callback from the PHY device's phy->phy_link_change() virtual method,
invoked by the PHY state machine.
phy_link_up() and phy_link_down(), the (indirect) callers of
phylink_phy_change(), are called with &phydev->lock acquired.
Then phylink_phy_change() acquires its own &pl->state_mutex, to
serialize changes made to its pl->phy_state and pl->link_config.
So all other instances of &pl->state_mutex and &phydev->lock must be
consistent with this order.
Problem impact
==============
I think the kernel runs a serious deadlock risk if an existing
phylink_resolve() thread, which results in a phy_config_inband() call,
is concurrent with a phy_link_up() or phy_link_down() call, which will
deadlock on &pl->state_mutex in phylink_phy_change(). Practically
speaking, the impact may be limited by the slow speed of the medium
auto-negotiation protocol, which makes it unlikely for the current state
to still be unresolved when a new one is detected, but I think the
problem is there. Nonetheless, the problem was discovered using lockdep.
Proposed solution
=================
Practically speaking, the phy_config_inband() requirement of having
phydev->lock acquired must transfer to the caller (phylink is the only
caller). There, it must bubble up until immediately before
&pl->state_mutex is acquired, for the cases where that takes place.
Solution details, considerations, notes
=======================================
This is the phy_config_inband() call graph:
sfp_upstream_ops :: connect_phy()
|
v
phylink_sfp_connect_phy()
|
v
phylink_sfp_config_phy()
|
| sfp_upstream_ops :: module_insert()
| |
| v
| phylink_sfp_module_insert()
| |
| | sfp_upstream_ops :: module_start()
| | |
| | v
| | phylink_sfp_module_start()
| | |
| v v
| phylink_sfp_config_optical()
phylink_start() | |
| phylink_resume() v v
| | phylink_sfp_set_config()
| | |
v v v
phylink_mac_initial_config()
| phylink_resolve()
| | phylink_ethtool_ksettings_set()
v v v
phylink_major_config()
|
v
phy_config_inband()
phylink_major_config() caller #1, phylink_mac_initial_config(), does not
acquire &pl->state_mutex nor do its callers. It must acquire
&pl->phydev->lock prior to calling phylink_major_config().
phylink_major_config() caller #2, phylink_resolve() acquires
&pl->state_mutex, thus also needs to acquire &pl->phydev->lock.
phylink_major_config() caller #3, phylink_ethtool_ksettings_set(), is
completely uninteresting, because it only call
---truncated---
📍 영향받는 시스템
Linux Kernel (phylink 및 phy_config_inband 관련 모듈 사용 버전)
⚔️ 공격 벡터
로컬 또는 네트워크 환경에서 PHY 상태 변화(Link up/down)를 유도하여 교착 상태를 트리거할 수 있음
🛡️ 대응 방법
리눅스 커널을 최신 보안 패치가 적용된 버전으로 업데이트하여 잠금 순서를 수정해야 함
🔧 검증 코드
출력된 커널 버전이 해당 취약점이 해결된 패치 버전 이후인지 확인하십시오.