linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.9 06/44] fs/exec.c: account for argv/envp pointers

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: <20170627141108.164071385@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jun 2017 16:12:18 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Qualys Security Advisory <qsa@...lys.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 06/44] fs/exec.c: account for argv/envp pointers

4.9-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>

commit 98da7d08850fb8bdeb395d6368ed15753304aa0c upstream.

When limiting the argv/envp strings during exec to 1/4 of the stack limit,
the storage of the pointers to the strings was not included.  This means
that an exec with huge numbers of tiny strings could eat 1/4 of the stack
limit in strings and then additional space would be later used by the
pointers to the strings.

For example, on 32-bit with a 8MB stack rlimit, an exec with 1677721
single-byte strings would consume less than 2MB of stack, the max (8MB /
4) amount allowed, but the pointers to the strings would consume the
remaining additional stack space (1677721 * 4 == 6710884).

The result (1677721 + 6710884 == 8388605) would exhaust stack space
entirely.  Controlling this stack exhaustion could result in
pathological behavior in setuid binaries (CVE-2017-1000365).

[akpm@...ux-foundation.org: additional commenting from Kees]
Fixes: b6a2fea39318 ("mm: variable length argument support")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170622001720.GA32173@beast
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Qualys Security Advisory <qsa@...lys.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 fs/exec.c |   28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/exec.c
+++ b/fs/exec.c
@@ -215,8 +215,26 @@ static struct page *get_arg_page(struct
 
 	if (write) {
 		unsigned long size = bprm->vma->vm_end - bprm->vma->vm_start;
+		unsigned long ptr_size;
 		struct rlimit *rlim;
 
+		/*
+		 * Since the stack will hold pointers to the strings, we
+		 * must account for them as well.
+		 *
+		 * The size calculation is the entire vma while each arg page is
+		 * built, so each time we get here it's calculating how far it
+		 * is currently (rather than each call being just the newly
+		 * added size from the arg page).  As a result, we need to
+		 * always add the entire size of the pointers, so that on the
+		 * last call to get_arg_page() we'll actually have the entire
+		 * correct size.
+		 */
+		ptr_size = (bprm->argc + bprm->envc) * sizeof(void *);
+		if (ptr_size > ULONG_MAX - size)
+			goto fail;
+		size += ptr_size;
+
 		acct_arg_size(bprm, size / PAGE_SIZE);
 
 		/*
@@ -234,13 +252,15 @@ static struct page *get_arg_page(struct
 		 *    to work from.
 		 */
 		rlim = current->signal->rlim;
-		if (size > ACCESS_ONCE(rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_cur) / 4) {
-			put_page(page);
-			return NULL;
-		}
+		if (size > READ_ONCE(rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_cur) / 4)
+			goto fail;
 	}
 
 	return page;
+
+fail:
+	put_page(page);
+	return NULL;
 }
 
 static void put_arg_page(struct page *page)