[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200318160316.GC4144@linux-8ccs>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:03:16 +0100
From: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jeff Vander Stoep <jeffv@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] kmod: make request_module() return an error when
autoloading is disabled
+++ Eric Biggers [14/03/20 14:34 -0700]:
>From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
>
>It's long been possible to disable kernel module autoloading completely
>(while still allowing manual module insertion) by setting
>/proc/sys/kernel/modprobe to the empty string. This can be preferable
>to setting it to a nonexistent file since it avoids the overhead of an
>attempted execve(), avoids potential deadlocks, and avoids the call to
>security_kernel_module_request() and thus on SELinux-based systems
>eliminates the need to write SELinux rules to dontaudit module_request.
>
>However, when module autoloading is disabled in this way,
>request_module() returns 0. This is broken because callers expect 0 to
>mean that the module was successfully loaded.
>
>Apparently this was never noticed because this method of disabling
>module autoloading isn't used much, and also most callers don't use the
>return value of request_module() since it's always necessary to check
>whether the module registered its functionality or not anyway. But
>improperly returning 0 can indeed confuse a few callers, for example
>get_fs_type() in fs/filesystems.c where it causes a WARNING to be hit:
>
> if (!fs && (request_module("fs-%.*s", len, name) == 0)) {
> fs = __get_fs_type(name, len);
> WARN_ONCE(!fs, "request_module fs-%.*s succeeded, but still no fs?\n", len, name);
> }
>
>This is easily reproduced with:
>
> echo > /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe
> mount -t NONEXISTENT none /
>
>It causes:
>
> request_module fs-NONEXISTENT succeeded, but still no fs?
> WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 1106 at fs/filesystems.c:275 get_fs_type+0xd6/0xf0
> [...]
>
>This should actually use pr_warn_once() rather than WARN_ONCE(), since
>it's also user-reachable if userspace immediately unloads the module.
>Regardless, request_module() should correctly return an error when it
>fails. So let's make it return -ENOENT, which matches the error when
>the modprobe binary doesn't exist.
>
>I've also sent patches to document and test this case.
>
>Acked-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
>Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
>Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>Cc: Jeff Vander Stoep <jeffv@...gle.com>
>Cc: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>
>Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
>Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
Reviewed-by: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists