linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.19 053/105] mm/mincore.c: make mincore() more conservative

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: <20190522085741.GB8174@amd>
Date:   Wed, 22 May 2019 10:57:41 +0200
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Josh Snyder <joshs@...flix.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Kevin Easton <kevin@...rana.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Daniel Gruss <daniel@...ss.cc>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 053/105] mm/mincore.c: make mincore() more
 conservative

Hi!

> commit 134fca9063ad4851de767d1768180e5dede9a881 upstream.
> 
> The semantics of what mincore() considers to be resident is not
> completely clear, but Linux has always (since 2.3.52, which is when
> mincore() was initially done) treated it as "page is available in page
> cache".
> 
> That's potentially a problem, as that [in]directly exposes
> meta-information about pagecache / memory mapping state even about
> memory not strictly belonging to the process executing the syscall,
> opening possibilities for sidechannel attacks.
> 
> Change the semantics of mincore() so that it only reveals pagecache
> information for non-anonymous mappings that belog to files that the
> calling process could (if it tried to) successfully open for writing;
> otherwise we'd be including shared non-exclusive mappings, which
> 
>  - is the sidechannel
> 
>  - is not the usecase for mincore(), as that's primarily used for data,
>    not (shared) text

...

> @@ -189,8 +205,13 @@ static long do_mincore(unsigned long add
>  	vma = find_vma(current->mm, addr);
>  	if (!vma || addr < vma->vm_start)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
> -	mincore_walk.mm = vma->vm_mm;
>  	end = min(vma->vm_end, addr + (pages << PAGE_SHIFT));
> +	if (!can_do_mincore(vma)) {
> +		unsigned long pages = DIV_ROUND_UP(end - addr, PAGE_SIZE);
> +		memset(vec, 1, pages);
> +		return pages;
> +	}
> +	mincore_walk.mm = vma->vm_mm;
>  	err = walk_page_range(addr, end, &mincore_walk);

We normally return errors when we deny permissions; but this one just
returns success and wrong data.

Could we return -EPERM there? If not, should it at least get a
comment?

Thanks,
									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)