linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm,fork: introduce MADV

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 15 Aug 2017 15:51:14 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     riel@...hat.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhocko@...nel.org,
        mike.kravetz@...cle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, fweimer@...hat.com,
        colm@...costs.net, keescook@...omium.org, luto@...capital.net,
        wad@...omium.org, mingo@...nel.org, kirill@...temov.name,
        dave.hansen@...el.com, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, willy@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm,fork: introduce MADV_WIPEONFORK

On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 17:28:29 -0400 riel@...hat.com wrote:

> From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
> 
> Introduce MADV_WIPEONFORK semantics, which result in a VMA being
> empty in the child process after fork. This differs from MADV_DONTFORK
> in one important way.
> 
> If a child process accesses memory that was MADV_WIPEONFORK, it
> will get zeroes. The address ranges are still valid, they are just empty.
> 
> If a child process accesses memory that was MADV_DONTFORK, it will
> get a segmentation fault, since those address ranges are no longer
> valid in the child after fork.
> 
> Since MADV_DONTFORK also seems to be used to allow very large
> programs to fork in systems with strict memory overcommit restrictions,
> changing the semantics of MADV_DONTFORK might break existing programs.
> 
> MADV_WIPEONFORK only works on private, anonymous VMAs.
> 
> The use case is libraries that store or cache information, and
> want to know that they need to regenerate it in the child process
> after fork.
> 
> Examples of this would be:
> - systemd/pulseaudio API checks (fail after fork)
>   (replacing a getpid check, which is too slow without a PID cache)
> - PKCS#11 API reinitialization check (mandated by specification)
> - glibc's upcoming PRNG (reseed after fork)
> - OpenSSL PRNG (reseed after fork)
> 
> The security benefits of a forking server having a re-inialized
> PRNG in every child process are pretty obvious. However, due to
> libraries having all kinds of internal state, and programs getting
> compiled with many different versions of each library, it is
> unreasonable to expect calling programs to re-initialize everything
> manually after fork.
> 
> A further complication is the proliferation of clone flags,
> programs bypassing glibc's functions to call clone directly,
> and programs calling unshare, causing the glibc pthread_atfork
> hook to not get called.
> 
> It would be better to have the kernel take care of this automatically.

I'll add "The patch also adds MADV_KEEPONFORK, to undo the effects of a
prior MADV_WIPEONFORK." here.

I guess it isn't worth mentioning that these things can cause VMA
merges and splits. 

> --- a/mm/madvise.c
> +++ b/mm/madvise.c
> @@ -80,6 +80,17 @@ static long madvise_behavior(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>  		}
>  		new_flags &= ~VM_DONTCOPY;
>  		break;
> +	case MADV_WIPEONFORK:
> +		/* MADV_WIPEONFORK is only supported on anonymous memory. */
> +		if (vma->vm_file || vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED) {
> +			error = -EINVAL;
> +			goto out;
> +		}
> +		new_flags |= VM_WIPEONFORK;
> +		break;
> +	case MADV_KEEPONFORK:
> +		new_flags &= ~VM_WIPEONFORK;
> +		break;
>  	case MADV_DONTDUMP:
>  		new_flags |= VM_DONTDUMP;
>  		break;

It seems odd to permit MADV_KEEPONFORK against other-than-anon vmas?