linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs/proc/kcore.c: Omit kernel text area for hardened usercopy feature

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:   Wed, 7 Sep 2016 23:24:47 +0200
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/proc/kcore.c: Omit kernel text area for hardened
 usercopy feature

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 09:25:59PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 09:58:01AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> -                             n = copy_to_user(buffer, (char *)start, tsz);
> > >> +                             buf = kzalloc(tsz, GFP_KERNEL);
> > >
> > > You have to add some limit and a loop, otherwise a user can eat all kernel memory,
> > > or copies > KMALLOC_MAX wouldn't work. Probably only get a single page.
> > 
> > 'start' and 'tsz' is already chunked to be aligned pages (well, as
> > aligned as they can be: the beginning and end obviously won't be).
> > Above the loop:
> > 
> >         if ((tsz = (PAGE_SIZE - (start & ~PAGE_MASK))) > buflen)
> >                 tsz = buflen;
> > 
> > and then inside the loop:
> > 
> >                 tsz = (buflen > PAGE_SIZE ? PAGE_SIZE : buflen);
> > 
> > so it's already limited to one page.
> > 
> > That said, it *might* be worth moving the temporary allocation to the
> > top, or even to move it to open_kcore(). It used to be a special case
> > for just the vmalloc region, now it's always done.
> > 
> > So instead of having two different copies of the same special case for
> > the two different cases, why not try to unify them and just have one
> > common (page-sized) buffer allocation?

I'll give this more testing, but it looks ok so far,
also maybe it should be split into 2 parts:
  - adding the common buffer
  - ktext using bounce buffer

jirka


diff --git a/fs/proc/kcore.c b/fs/proc/kcore.c
index a939f5ed7f89..7405b3894183 100644
--- a/fs/proc/kcore.c
+++ b/fs/proc/kcore.c
@@ -430,6 +430,7 @@ static void elf_kcore_store_hdr(char *bufp, int nphdr, int dataoff)
 static ssize_t
 read_kcore(struct file *file, char __user *buffer, size_t buflen, loff_t *fpos)
 {
+	char *buf = file->private_data;
 	ssize_t acc = 0;
 	size_t size, tsz;
 	size_t elf_buflen;
@@ -500,23 +501,20 @@ read_kcore(struct file *file, char __user *buffer, size_t buflen, loff_t *fpos)
 			if (clear_user(buffer, tsz))
 				return -EFAULT;
 		} else if (is_vmalloc_or_module_addr((void *)start)) {
-			char * elf_buf;
-
-			elf_buf = kzalloc(tsz, GFP_KERNEL);
-			if (!elf_buf)
-				return -ENOMEM;
-			vread(elf_buf, (char *)start, tsz);
+			vread(buf, (char *)start, tsz);
 			/* we have to zero-fill user buffer even if no read */
-			if (copy_to_user(buffer, elf_buf, tsz)) {
-				kfree(elf_buf);
+			if (copy_to_user(buffer, buf, tsz))
 				return -EFAULT;
-			}
-			kfree(elf_buf);
 		} else {
 			if (kern_addr_valid(start)) {
 				unsigned long n;
 
-				n = copy_to_user(buffer, (char *)start, tsz);
+				/*
+				 * Using bounce buffer to bypass the
+				 *hardened user copy kernel text checks.
+				 */
+				memcpy(buf, (char *) start, tsz);
+				n = copy_to_user(buffer, buf, tsz);
 				/*
 				 * We cannot distinguish between fault on source
 				 * and fault on destination. When this happens
@@ -549,6 +547,11 @@ static int open_kcore(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
 {
 	if (!capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
 		return -EPERM;
+
+	filp->private_data = (void *) __get_free_pages(GFP_KERNEL, 0);
+	if (!filp->private_data)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
 	if (kcore_need_update)
 		kcore_update_ram();
 	if (i_size_read(inode) != proc_root_kcore->size) {
@@ -556,13 +559,20 @@ static int open_kcore(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
 		i_size_write(inode, proc_root_kcore->size);
 		inode_unlock(inode);
 	}
+
 	return 0;
 }
 
+static int release_kcore(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
+{
+	free_pages((unsigned long) file->private_data, 0);
+	return 0;
+}
 
 static const struct file_operations proc_kcore_operations = {
 	.read		= read_kcore,
 	.open		= open_kcore,
+	.release	= release_kcore,
 	.llseek		= default_llseek,
 };