linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/6] arm64: ptrace: allow tracer to skip a system call

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: <540578AE.8090000@linaro.org>
Date:	Tue, 02 Sep 2014 16:58:38 +0900
From:	AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>
To:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
CC:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
	Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@...aro.org>,
	"arndb@...db.de" <arndb@...db.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/6] arm64: ptrace: allow tracer to skip a system call

On 09/01/2014 08:37 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 06:55:46AM +0100, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
>> On 08/27/2014 02:51 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 01:35:17AM +0100, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
>>>> Oops, you're absolutely right. I didn't think of this case.
>>>> syscall_trace_enter() should not return a syscallno directly, but always
>>>> return -1 if syscallno < 0. (except when secure_computing() returns with -1)
>>>> This also implies that tracehook_report_syscall() should also have a return value.
>>>>
>>>> Will, is this fine with you?
>>>
>>> Well, the first thing that jumps out at me is why this is being done
>>> completely differently for arm64 and arm. I thought adding the new ptrace
>>> requests would reconcile the differences?
>>
>> I'm not sure what portion of my code you mentioned as "completely different", but
>>
>> 1)
>> setting x0 to -ENOSYS is necessary because, otherwise, user-issued syscall(-1) will
>> return a bogus value when audit tracing is on.
>>
>> Please note that, on arm,
>>                    not traced      traced
>>                    ------          ------
>> syscall(-1)      aborted         OOPs(BUG_ON)
>> syscall(-3000)   aborted         aborted
>> syscall(1000)    ENOSYS          ENOSYS
>>
>> So, anyhow, its a bit difficult and meaningless to mimic these invalid cases.
>
> I'm not suggesting we make ourselves bug-compatible with ARM. Instead, I'd
> rather see a series of patches getting the ARM code working correctly,
> before we go off doing something different for arm64.

I see.

>> 2)
>> branching a new label, syscall_trace_return_skip (see entry.S), after syscall_trace_enter()
>> is necessary in order to avoid OOPS in audit_syscall_enter() as we discussed.
>>
>> Did I make it clear?
>
> Sure. So let's fix ARM, then look at the arm64 port after that. I really
> want to avoid divergence in this area.

Okey, I will start with fixing the issue on arm.

-Takahiro AKASHI

> Will
>
--
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/