linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mips: vdso: conditionalize 32-bit time functions on COMPAT_32BIT

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: <CAK8P3a11g-UXcYdudDtp0TWCQAfotpc-63BqYwn-a9LDxV-b+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Dec 2019 16:37:17 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
        Paul Burton <paulburton@...nel.org>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips: vdso: conditionalize 32-bit time functions on COMPAT_32BIT_TIME

On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 3:37 PM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 1:34 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> >
> > - Why does it crash in the first place rather than returning -ENOSYS?
>
> There's a bit of speculation about this in the original thread that
> prompted this patch (you're CC'd).
>
> >
> > - How does it actually work if you run an application built against
> >   an old musl version on a kernel that tries to make this not work?
> >   Do you just get a random time (uninitialized user space stack) and
> >   work with that without checking the error code?
>
> Actually, your patch fails here. The ts struct remains as it was
> before, filled with garbage. No good. My original patch in this
> thread, though, does result in the correct value being written to ts.

Ok, that is the intended behavior then, clock_gettime() needs
to fail with -EINVAL or -ENOSYS here (depending on the libc
implementation), and of course the data is not updated.

Returning success from clock_gettime() on a kernel with only
time64 support and a libc with only time32 support (or vice
versa) would be a bug.

    Arnd