[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrUWpXWLn4wfV6wneOwX+12fbFZ2af=JrZiwq-5RGYiT4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:54:40 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@....de>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 3.15: kernel BUG at kernel/auditsc.c:1525!
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 2:48 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 06/16/2014 02:35 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> To hpa, etc: It appears that entry_32.S is missing any call to the
>> audit exit hook on the badsys path. If I'm diagnosing this bug report
>> correctly, this causes OOPSes.
>>
>> The the world at large: it's increasingly apparent that no one (except
>> maybe the blackhats) has ever scrutinized the syscall auditing code.
>> This is two old severe bugs in the code that have probably been there
>> for a long time.
>>
>
> Yes, the audit code is a total mess.
>
>> The bad syscall nr paths are their own incomprehensible route
>> through the entry control flow. Rearrange them to work just like
>> syscalls that return -ENOSYS.
>
> I have to admit... it sort of lends itself to a solution like this:
>
> /* For the 64-bit case, analogous code for 32 bits */
> movl $__NR_syscall_max+1,%ecx # *Not* __NR_syscall_max
> cmpq %rcx,%rax
> cmovae %rcx,%rax
> movq %r10,%rcx
> call *sys_call_table(,%rax,8)
>
> ... and having an extra (invalid) system call slot in the syscall table
> beyond the end instead of branching off separately.
>
> (Note: we could use either cmova or cmovae, and either the 32- or 64-bit
> form... the reason why is left as an exercise to the reader.)
For 64-bit, I want to do this instead:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git/commit/?h=x86/seccomp-fastpath&id=a5ec2d7af2c54b55fc7201fa662138b53fbbda39
I see no reason why the 64-bit badsys code needs its own code path at
all. I haven't sent it yet because AFAICT it doesn't fix any bug, and
the series it's a part of isn't ready.
I'm also contemplating rewriting the 64-bit syscall entry work path in C.
--Andy
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists