linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] binfmt_elf: Fix PIE execution with randomization disabled (was Re: [RFC PATCH] binfmt_elf: Fix PIE execution with randomization disabled)

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]

Date:	Mon, 3 Oct 2011 15:03:05 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm00@...il.com>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc:	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm00@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	hongjiu.lu@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] binfmt_elf: Fix PIE execution with randomization
 disabled (was Re: [RFC PATCH] binfmt_elf: Fix PIE execution with
 randomization disabled)

On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 17:11:47 +0200 (CEST)
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz> wrote:

> 
> From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
> Subject: [PATCH] binfmt_elf: fix PIE execution with randomization disabled
> 
> The case of address space randomization being disabled in runtime through
> randomize_va_space sysctl is not treated properly in load_elf_binary(),
> resulting in SIGKILL coming at exec() time for certain PIE-linked binaries
> in case the randomization has been disabled at runtime prior to calling
> exec().
> 
> Handle the randomize_va_space == 0 case the same way as if we were not
> supporting .text randomization at all.
> 
> Based on original patch by H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@...el.com> and
> Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>
> 
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
> Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
> Cc: Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
> ---
>  fs/binfmt_elf.c |    5 ++++-
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/binfmt_elf.c b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> index dd0fdfc..bb11fe4 100644
> --- a/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> +++ b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> @@ -795,7 +795,10 @@ static int load_elf_binary(struct linux_binprm *bprm, struct pt_regs *regs)
>  			 * might try to exec.  This is because the brk will
>  			 * follow the loader, and is not movable.  */
>  #if defined(CONFIG_X86) || defined(CONFIG_ARM)
> -			load_bias = 0;
> +			if (current->flags & PF_RANDOMIZE)
> +				load_bias = 0;
> +			else
> +				load_bias = ELF_PAGESTART(ELF_ET_DYN_BASE - vaddr);
>  #else
>  			load_bias = ELF_PAGESTART(ELF_ET_DYN_BASE - vaddr);
>  #endif

Guys, it took several people several days and 10+ emails to work out
what's happening in there, and the first attempt to fix it was buggy. 
This is all a huuuuge signal that the code is unobvious, hard to
understand, hard to maintain.

Please, let's get a good code comment in there while it's fresh in your
minds.  So the next person who comes along doesn't have the same amount
of difficulty?


--
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/