On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 02:44:16PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> CCing Arseniy and Bobby.
>
> On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 12:26:21PM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > On 4/30/26 9:11 AM, Yiqi Sun wrote:
> > > vsockmon mirrors packets through virtio_transport_build_skb(), which
> > > builds a new skb and copies the payload into it. For non-linear skbs,
> > > this goes through virtio_transport_copy_nonlinear_skb().
> > >
> > > Helper manually initializes a iov_iter, but leaves iov_iter.count unset.
> > > As a result, skb_copy_datagram_iter() sees zero writable bytes
> > > in the destination iterator and copies no payload data.
> > >
> > > This becomes an info leak because virtio_transport_build_skb() has
> > > already reserved payload_len bytes in the new skb with skb_put(). The
> > > skb is then returned to the tap path with that payload area still
> > > uninitialized, so userspace reading from a vsockmon device can observe
> > > heap contents and potentially kernel address.
> > >
> > > Fix it by initializing iov_iter.count to the number of bytes to copy.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 4b0bf10eb077 ("vsock/virtio: non-linear skb handling for tap")
> > > Signed-off-by: Yiqi Sun <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> > > b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> > > index 416d533f493d..6b26ee57ccab 100644
> > > --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> > > +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> > > @@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ static void virtio_transport_copy_nonlinear_skb(const
> > > struct sk_buff *skb,
> > > iov_iter.nr_segs = 1;
> > >
> > > to_copy = min_t(size_t, len, skb->len);
> > > -
> > > + iov_iter.count = to_copy;
> > > skb_copy_datagram_iter(skb, VIRTIO_VSOCK_SKB_CB(skb)->offset,
> > > &iov_iter, to_copy);
> >
> > @Stefano, @Stefan, the patch LGTM, but sashiko pointed out to a
> > pre-existing issue you should probably want to address:
> >
> > > to_copy = min_t(size_t, len, skb->len);
> > Does this length calculation account for the offset when a packet is
> > split across multiple transmissions?
> > If a packet is requeued, VIRTIO_VSOCK_SKB_CB(skb)->offset is increased,
> > but to_copy still evaluates to the full length of the skb.
>
> Yep, I just checked and vhost-vsock is the only place where we call
> virtio_transport_deliver_tap_pkt() wiht an offset != 0, but I agree that we
> should also fix it.
>
> Looking better in net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c I think this is a
> regression, indeed we have this comment in virtio_transport_build_skb():
>
> /* A packet could be split to fit the RX buffer, so we can retrieve
> * the payload length from the header and the buffer pointer taking
> * care of the offset in the original packet.
> */
> pkt_hdr = virtio_vsock_hdr(pkt);
>
> Before commit 71dc9ec9ac7d ("virtio/vsock: replace virtio_vsock_pkt with
> sk_buff") we read the payload lenght from the header that is always set to
> the right value before delivering the packet to the tap.
>
> From that commit, we don't to consider the offset anymore since we started
> to use `len` from the skb, so IMO we should go back to what we did before
> it, I mean:
>
> payload_len = le32_to_cpu(pkt->hdr.len);
>
> @Bobby do you remember why we did that change? Or if you see any issue going
> back to what we did initially?
I think this was just one that made it through the cracks. I vaguely
recall a few other instances where I assumed skb->len could stand-in for
hdr.len, but it didn't hold.
Using hdr.len like the original looks correct to me.
Best,
Bobby
