linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf: check branch sampling priv level in generic 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <CABPqkBTkSkHF9Y58FkEHDc4VV7Af+5erheD8GUhtsKup5cN5=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 21 May 2013 14:38:15 +0200
From:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: check branch sampling priv level in generic code

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 12:53:37PM +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> >
> > This patch reverts commit 7cc23cd:
> >  perf/x86/intel/lbr: Demand proper privileges for PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_KERNEL
> >
> > The check is now implemented in generic code
> > instead of x86 specific code. That way we
> > do not have to repeat the test in each arch
> > supporting branch sampling.
>
> Good point indeed.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_lbr.c |   13 +++----------
> >  kernel/events/core.c                       |    9 ++++-----
> >  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
>
> > diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> > index 9dc297f..cf79c81 100644
> > --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> > @@ -6327,11 +6327,6 @@ static int perf_copy_attr(struct perf_event_attr __user *uattr,
> >               if (!(mask & ~PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PLM_ALL))
> >                       return -EINVAL;
> >
> > -             /* kernel level capture: check permissions */
> > -             if ((mask & PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PERM_PLM)
> > -                 && perf_paranoid_kernel() && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> > -                     return -EACCES;
> > -
>
> Oh hey, there was a check..
>
There was a check. But I realized it was broken. It was checking user+kernel.
But it did not cover the case where the priv level which propagated from the
event and was not specific to the branch_sample_type.


>
> >               /* propagate priv level, when not set for branch */
> >               if (!(mask & PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_PLM_ALL)) {
> >
> > @@ -6349,6 +6344,10 @@ static int perf_copy_attr(struct perf_event_attr __user *uattr,
> >                        */
> >                       attr->branch_sample_type = mask;
> >               }
> > +             /* kernel level capture: check permissions */
> > +             if ((mask & PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_KERNEL)
> > +                 && perf_paranoid_kernel() && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> > +                     return -EACCES;
> >       }
> >
> >       if (attr->sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_REGS_USER) {
> > --
> > 1.7.9.5
> >
--
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/