wireguard: noise: reject peers with low order public keys

wireguard: noise: reject peers with low order public keys

Our static-static calculation returns a failure if the public key is of
low order. We check for this when peers are added, and don't allow them
to be added if they're low order, except in the case where we haven't
yet been given a private key. In that case, we would defer the removal
of the peer until we're given a private key, since at that point we're
doing new static-static calculations which incur failures we can act on.
This meant, however, that we wound up removing peers rather late in the
configuration flow.

Syzkaller points out that peer_remove calls flush_workqueue, which in
turn might then wait for sending a handshake initiation to complete.
Since handshake initiation needs the static identity lock, holding the
static identity lock while calling peer_remove can result in a rare
deadlock. We have precisely this case in this situation of late-stage
peer removal based on an invalid public key. We can't drop the lock when
removing, because then incoming handshakes might interact with a bogus
static-static calculation.

While the band-aid patch for this would involve breaking up the peer
removal into two steps like wg_peer_remove_all does, in order to solve
the locking issue, there's actually a much more elegant way of fixing
this:

If the static-static calculation succeeds with one private key, it
*must* succeed with all others, because all 32-byte strings map to valid
private keys, thanks to clamping. That means we can get rid of this
silly dance and locking headaches of removing peers late in the
configuration flow, and instead just reject them early on, regardless of
whether the device has yet been assigned a private key. For the case
where the device doesn't yet have a private key, we safely use zeros
just for the purposes of checking for low order points by way of
checking the output of the calculation.

The following PoC will trigger the deadlock:

ip link add wg0 type wireguard
ip addr add 10.0.0.1/24 dev wg0
ip link set wg0 up
ping -f 10.0.0.2 &
while true; do
        wg set wg0 private-key /dev/null peer AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA= allowed-ips 10.0.0.0/24 endpoint 10.0.0.3:1234
        wg set wg0 private-key <(echo AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA=)
done

[    0.949105] ======================================================
[    0.949550] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[    0.950143] 5.5.0-debug+ #18 Not tainted
[    0.950431] ------------------------------------------------------
[    0.950959] wg/89 is trying to acquire lock:
[    0.951252] ffff8880333e2128 ((wq_completion)wg-kex-wg0){+.+.}, at: flush_workqueue+0xe3/0x12f0
[    0.951865]
[    0.951865] but task is already holding lock:
[    0.952280] ffff888032819bc0 (&wg->static_identity.lock){++++}, at: wg_set_device+0x95d/0xcc0
[    0.953011]
[    0.953011] which lock already depends on the new lock.
[    0.953011]
[    0.953651]
[    0.953651] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[    0.954292]
[    0.954292] -> #2 (&wg->static_identity.lock){++++}:
[    0.954804]        lock_acquire+0x127/0x350
[    0.955133]        down_read+0x83/0x410
[    0.955428]        wg_noise_handshake_create_initiation+0x97/0x700
[    0.955885]        wg_packet_send_handshake_initiation+0x13a/0x280
[    0.956401]        wg_packet_handshake_send_worker+0x10/0x20
[    0.956841]        process_one_work+0x806/0x1500
[    0.957167]        worker_thread+0x8c/0xcb0
[    0.957549]        kthread+0x2ee/0x3b0
[    0.957792]        ret_from_fork+0x24/0x30
[    0.958234]
[    0.958234] -> #1 ((work_completion)(&peer->transmit_handshake_work)){+.+.}:
[    0.958808]        lock_acquire+0x127/0x350
[    0.959075]        process_one_work+0x7ab/0x1500
[    0.959369]        worker_thread+0x8c/0xcb0
[    0.959639]        kthread+0x2ee/0x3b0
[    0.959896]        ret_from_fork+0x24/0x30
[    0.960346]
[    0.960346] -> #0 ((wq_completion)wg-kex-wg0){+.+.}:
[    0.960945]        check_prev_add+0x167/0x1e20
[    0.961351]        __lock_acquire+0x2012/0x3170
[    0.961725]        lock_acquire+0x127/0x350
[    0.961990]        flush_workqueue+0x106/0x12f0
[    0.962280]        peer_remove_after_dead+0x160/0x220
[    0.962600]        wg_set_device+0xa24/0xcc0
[    0.962994]        genl_rcv_msg+0x52f/0xe90
[    0.963298]        netlink_rcv_skb+0x111/0x320
[    0.963618]        genl_rcv+0x1f/0x30
[    0.963853]        netlink_unicast+0x3f6/0x610
[    0.964245]        netlink_sendmsg+0x700/0xb80
[    0.964586]        __sys_sendto+0x1dd/0x2c0
[    0.964854]        __x64_sys_sendto+0xd8/0x1b0
[    0.965141]        do_syscall_64+0x90/0xd9a
[    0.965408]        entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
[    0.965769]
[    0.965769] other info that might help us debug this:
[    0.965769]
[    0.966337] Chain exists of:
[    0.966337]   (wq_completion)wg-kex-wg0 --> (work_completion)(&peer->transmit_handshake_work) --> &wg->static_identity.lock
[    0.966337]
[    0.967417]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[    0.967417]
[    0.967836]        CPU0                    CPU1
[    0.968155]        ----                    ----
[    0.968497]   lock(&wg->static_identity.lock);
[    0.968779]                                lock((work_completion)(&peer->transmit_handshake_work));
[    0.969345]                                lock(&wg->static_identity.lock);
[    0.969809]   lock((wq_completion)wg-kex-wg0);
[    0.970146]
[    0.970146]  *** DEADLOCK ***
[    0.970146]
[    0.970531] 5 locks held by wg/89:
[    0.970908]  #0: ffffffff827433c8 (cb_lock){++++}, at: genl_rcv+0x10/0x30
[    0.971400]  #1: ffffffff82743480 (genl_mutex){+.+.}, at: genl_rcv_msg+0x642/0xe90
[    0.971924]  #2: ffffffff827160c0 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}, at: wg_set_device+0x9f/0xcc0
[    0.972488]  #3: ffff888032819de0 (&wg->device_update_lock){+.+.}, at: wg_set_device+0xb0/0xcc0
[    0.973095]  #4: ffff888032819bc0 (&wg->static_identity.lock){++++}, at: wg_set_device+0x95d/0xcc0
[    0.973653]
[    0.973653] stack backtrace:
[    0.973932] CPU: 1 PID: 89 Comm: wg Not tainted 5.5.0-debug+ #18
[    0.974476] Call Trace:
[    0.974638]  dump_stack+0x97/0xe0
[    0.974869]  check_noncircular+0x312/0x3e0
[    0.975132]  ? print_circular_bug+0x1f0/0x1f0
[    0.975410]  ? __kernel_text_address+0x9/0x30
[    0.975727]  ? unwind_get_return_address+0x51/0x90
[    0.976024]  check_prev_add+0x167/0x1e20
[    0.976367]  ? graph_lock+0x70/0x160
[    0.976682]  __lock_acquire+0x2012/0x3170
[    0.976998]  ? register_lock_class+0x1140/0x1140
[    0.977323]  lock_acquire+0x127/0x350
[    0.977627]  ? flush_workqueue+0xe3/0x12f0
[    0.977890]  flush_workqueue+0x106/0x12f0
[    0.978147]  ? flush_workqueue+0xe3/0x12f0
[    0.978410]  ? find_held_lock+0x2c/0x110
[    0.978662]  ? lock_downgrade+0x6e0/0x6e0
[    0.978919]  ? queue_rcu_work+0x60/0x60
[    0.979166]  ? netif_napi_del+0x151/0x3b0
[    0.979501]  ? peer_remove_after_dead+0x160/0x220
[    0.979871]  peer_remove_after_dead+0x160/0x220
[    0.980232]  wg_set_device+0xa24/0xcc0
[    0.980516]  ? deref_stack_reg+0x8e/0xc0
[    0.980801]  ? set_peer+0xe10/0xe10
[    0.981040]  ? __ww_mutex_check_waiters+0x150/0x150
[    0.981430]  ? __nla_validate_parse+0x163/0x270
[    0.981719]  ? genl_family_rcv_msg_attrs_parse+0x13f/0x310
[    0.982078]  genl_rcv_msg+0x52f/0xe90
[    0.982348]  ? genl_family_rcv_msg_attrs_parse+0x310/0x310
[    0.982690]  ? register_lock_class+0x1140/0x1140
[    0.983049]  netlink_rcv_skb+0x111/0x320
[    0.983298]  ? genl_family_rcv_msg_attrs_parse+0x310/0x310
[    0.983645]  ? netlink_ack+0x880/0x880
[    0.983888]  genl_rcv+0x1f/0x30
[    0.984168]  netlink_unicast+0x3f6/0x610
[    0.984443]  ? netlink_detachskb+0x60/0x60
[    0.984729]  ? find_held_lock+0x2c/0x110
[    0.984976]  netlink_sendmsg+0x700/0xb80
[    0.985220]  ? netlink_broadcast_filtered+0xa60/0xa60
[    0.985533]  __sys_sendto+0x1dd/0x2c0
[    0.985763]  ? __x64_sys_getpeername+0xb0/0xb0
[    0.986039]  ? sockfd_lookup_light+0x17/0x160
[    0.986397]  ? __sys_recvmsg+0x8c/0xf0
[    0.986711]  ? __sys_recvmsg_sock+0xd0/0xd0
[    0.987018]  __x64_sys_sendto+0xd8/0x1b0
[    0.987283]  ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x39b/0x5a0
[    0.987666]  do_syscall_64+0x90/0xd9a
[    0.987903]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
[    0.988223] RIP: 0033:0x7fe77c12003e
[    0.988508] Code: c3 8b 07 85 c0 75 24 49 89 fb 48 89 f0 48 89 d7 48 89 ce 4c 89 c2 4d 89 ca 4c 8b 44 24 08 4c 8b 4c 24 10 4c 4
[    0.989666] RSP: 002b:00007fffada2ed58 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000002c
[    0.990137] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fe77c159d48 RCX: 00007fe77c12003e
[    0.990583] RDX: 0000000000000040 RSI: 000055fd1d38e020 RDI: 0000000000000004
[    0.991091] RBP: 000055fd1d38e020 R08: 000055fd1cb63358 R09: 000000000000000c
[    0.991568] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 000000000000002c
[    0.992014] R13: 0000000000000004 R14: 000055fd1d38e020 R15: 0000000000000001

Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Reported-by: syzbot <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>