linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 104/173] Prevent rt_sigqueueinfo and rt_tgsigqueueinfo from spoofing the signal code

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110426130349.GA7103@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:03:50 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org,
	stable-review@...nel.org, Julien Tinnes <jln@...gle.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 104/173] Prevent rt_sigqueueinfo and rt_tgsigqueueinfo
	from spoofing the signal code

On 04/25, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
> 2.6.27.59-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
>
> ------------------
>
> From: Julien Tinnes <jln@...gle.com>
>
> commit da48524eb20662618854bb3df2db01fc65f3070c upstream.

This also needs 243b422af9ea9af4ead07a8ad54c90d4f9b6081a

> Userland should be able to trust the pid and uid of the sender of a
> signal if the si_code is SI_TKILL.
>
> Unfortunately, the kernel has historically allowed sigqueueinfo() to
> send any si_code at all (as long as it was negative - to distinguish it
> from kernel-generated signals like SIGILL etc), so it could spoof a
> SI_TKILL with incorrect siginfo values.
>
> Happily, it looks like glibc has always set si_code to the appropriate
> SI_QUEUE, so there are probably no actual user code that ever uses
> anything but the appropriate SI_QUEUE flag.
>
> So just tighten the check for si_code (we used to allow any negative
> value), and add a (one-time) warning in case there are binaries out
> there that might depend on using other si_code values.
>
> Signed-off-by: Julien Tinnes <jln@...gle.com>
> Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
> [wt: 2.6.27 does not have do_rt_tgsigqueueinfo()]
>
> ---
>  kernel/signal.c |   16 ++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Index: longterm-2.6.27/kernel/signal.c
> ===================================================================
> --- longterm-2.6.27.orig/kernel/signal.c	2011-01-23 10:52:37.000000000 +0100
> +++ longterm-2.6.27/kernel/signal.c	2011-04-25 16:06:27.491278774 +0200
> @@ -2294,9 +2294,13 @@
>  		return -EFAULT;
>
>  	/* Not even root can pretend to send signals from the kernel.
> -	   Nor can they impersonate a kill(), which adds source info.  */
> -	if (info.si_code >= 0)
> +	 * Nor can they impersonate a kill()/tgkill(), which adds source info.
> +	 */
> +	if (info.si_code != SI_QUEUE) {
> +		/* We used to allow any < 0 si_code */
> +		WARN_ON_ONCE(info.si_code < 0);
>  		return -EPERM;
> +	}
>  	info.si_signo = sig;
>
>  	/* POSIX.1b doesn't mention process groups.  */
>
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/