Message-ID: <554DCB33.8080101@gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 09 May 2015 10:54:11 +0200
From:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
CC:	mtk.manpages@...il.com, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-man@...r.kernel.org" <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: sysctl_writes_strict documentation  + an oddity?

Hi Kees,

I discovered that you added /proc/sys/kernel/sysctl_writes_strict in
Linux 3.16. In passing, I'll just mention that was an API change that
should have been CCed to linux-api@...r.kernel.org.

Anyway, I've tried to write this file up for the proc(5) man page, 
and I have two requests:

1) Could you review this text?
2) I've found some behavior that surprised me, and I am wondering if it
   is intended. Could you let me know your thoughts?

===== 1) man-page text =====

The man-page text, heavily based on your text in
Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt, is as follows:

       /proc/sys/kernel/sysctl_writes_strict (since Linux 3.16)
              The  value  in  this  file  determines how the file offset
              affects the behavior of updating entries  in  files  under
              /proc/sys.  The file has three possible values:

              -1  This  provides  legacy  handling, with no printk warn‐
                  ings.  Each write(2) must fully contain the  value  to
                  be  written,  and  multiple  writes  on  the same file
                  descriptor will overwrite the entire value, regardless
                  of the file position.

              0   (default)  This  provides the same behavior as for -1,
                  but printk warnings are  written  for  processes  that
                  perform writes when the file offset is not 0.

              1   Respect  the  file  offset  when  writing strings into
                  /proc/sys files.  Multiple writes will append  to  the
                  value  buffer.   Anything  written  beyond the maximum
                  length of the value buffer will be ignored.  Writes to
                  numeric  /proc/sys entries must always be at file off‐
                  set 0 and the value must be  fully  contained  in  the
                  buffer provided to write(2).

===== 2) Behavior puzzle (a) =====

The last sentence quoted from the man page was based on your sentence

    Writes to numeric sysctl entries must always be at file position 0 
    and the value must be fully contained in the buffer sent in the write 
    syscall.

So, I had interpreted /proc/sys/kernel/sysctl_writes_strict==1 to
mean that if one writes into a numeric /proc/sys file at an offset
other than zero, the write() will fail with some kind of error.
But this seems not to be the case. Instead, the write() succeeds, 
but the file is left unmodified. That's surprising, I find. So, I'm
wondering whether the implementation deviates from your intention.

There's a test program below, which takes arguments as follows

    ./a.out pathname offset string

And here's a test run that demonstrates the behavior:

$ sudo sh -c "echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/sysctl_writes_strict"
$ cat /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max
32768
$ sudo dmesg --clear
$ sudo ./a.out /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max 1 3000
write() succeeded (return value 4)
$ cat /proc/sys/kernel/pid_max
32768
$ dmesg

As you can see above, an attempt was made to write into the
/proc/sys/kernel/pid_max file at offset 1.
The write() returned successfully (reporting 4 bytes written)
but the file contents were unchanged, and no printk() warning
was issued. Is this intended behavior?

===== 2) Behavior puzzle (b) =====

In commit f88083005ab319abba5d0b2e4e997558245493c8, there is this note:

    This adds the sysctl kernel.sysctl_writes_strict to control the write
    behavior.  The default (0) reports when VFS position is non-0 on a
    write, but retains legacy behavior, -1 disables the warning, and 1
    enables the position-respecting behavior.
    
    The long-term plan here is to wait for userspace to be fixed in response
    to the new warning and to then switch the default kernel behavior to the
    new position-respecting behavior.

(That last para was added to the commit message by AKPM, I see.)

But, I wonder here whether /proc/sys/kernel/sysctl_writes_strict==0
is going to help with the long-term plan. The problem is that in 
warn_sysctl_write(), pr_warn_once() is used. This means that only 
the first offending user-space application that writes to *any* 
/proc/sys file will generate the printk warning. If that application 
isn't fixed, then none of the other "broken" applications will be 
discovered. It therefore seems possible that it could be a very long
time before we could "switch the default kernel behavior to the
new position-respecting behavior".

Looking over old mails
(http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1695177/focus=23240),
I see that you're aware of the problem, but it seems to me that
the switch to pr_warn_once() (for fear of spamming the log) likely
dooms the long-term plan to failure. Your thoughts?

Cheers,

Michael


8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--8x--

#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <string.h>

#define errExit(msg) do { perror(msg); exit(EXIT_FAILURE); } while (0)

int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    char *pathname;
    off_t offset;
    char *string;
    int fd;
    ssize_t numWritten;

    if (argc != 4) {
        fprintf(stderr, "Usage: %s pathname offset string\n", argv[0]);
        exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
    }

    pathname = argv[1];
    offset = strtoll(argv[2], NULL, 0);
    string = argv[3];

    fd = open(pathname, O_RDWR);
    if (fd == -1)
        errExit("open");

    if (lseek(fd, offset, SEEK_SET) == -1)
        errExit("lseek");

    numWritten = write(fd, string, strlen(string));
    if (numWritten == -1)
        errExit("write");

    printf("write() succeeded (return value %zd)\n", numWritten);

    exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
}

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
--
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