On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 8:19 AM Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 07:47:09AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 7:37 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 9/9/25 8:35 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 7:04 AM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 6:32 AM Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 01:22:43PM +0000, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > >>>> Recently, syzbot started to abuse NBD with all kinds of sockets.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Commit cf1b2326b734 ("nbd: verify socket is supported during setup")
> > > >>>> made sure the socket supported a shutdown() method.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Explicitely accept TCP and UNIX stream sockets.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I'm not clear what the actual problem is, but I will say that libnbd &
> > > >>> nbdkit (which are another NBD client & server, interoperable with the
> > > >>> kernel) we support and use NBD over vsock[1]. And we could support
> > > >>> NBD over pretty much any stream socket (Infiniband?) [2].
> > > >>>
> > > >>> [1] https://libguestfs.org/nbd_aio_connect_vsock.3.html
> > > >>> https://libguestfs.org/nbdkit-service.1.html#AF_VSOCK
> > > >>> [2] https://libguestfs.org/nbd_connect_socket.3.html
> > > >>>
> > > >>> TCP and Unix domain sockets are by far the most widely used, but I
> > > >>> don't think it's fair to exclude other socket types.
> > > >>
> > > >> If we have known and supported socket types, please send a patch to add them.
> > > >>
> > > >> I asked the question last week and got nothing about vsock or other types.
> > > >>
> > > >> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CANn89iLNFHBMTF2Pb6hHERYpuih9eQZb6A12+ndzBcQs_kZoBA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > > >>
> > > >> For sure, we do not want datagram sockets, RAW, netlink, and many others.
> > > >
> > > > BTW vsock will probably fire lockdep warnings, I see GFP_KERNEL
> > > > being used in net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
>
> CC-ing Stefan & Stefano. Myself, I'm only using libnbd
> (ie. userspace) over vsock, not the kernel client.
>
> > > > So you will have to fix this.
> > >
> > > Rather than play whack-a-mole with this, would it make sense to mark as
> > > socket as "writeback/reclaim" safe and base the nbd decision on that rather
> > > than attempt to maintain some allow/deny list of sockets?
> >
> > Even if a socket type was writeback/reclaim safe, probably NBD would not support
> > arbitrary socket type, like netlink, af_packet, or af_netrom.
> >
> > An allow list seems safer to me, with commits with a clear owner.
> >
> > If future syzbot reports are triggered, the bisection will point to
> > these commits.
>
> From the outside it seems really odd to hard code a list of "good"
> socket types into each kernel client that can open a socket. Normally
> if you wanted to restrict socket types wouldn't you do that through
> something more flexible like nftables?
nftables is user policy.
We need a kernel that will not crash, even if nftables is not
compiled/loaded/used .
>
> Rich.
>
> --
> Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
> Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
> virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a
> live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into KVM guests.
> http://libguestfs.org/virt-v2v
>
