[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 18:45:37 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@...il.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Relocate execve() sanity checks
On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 05:40:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 09:00:10 -0700 Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> > While looking at the code paths for the proposed O_MAYEXEC flag, I saw
> > some things that looked like they should be fixed up.
> >
> > exec: Change uselib(2) IS_SREG() failure to EACCES
> > This just regularizes the return code on uselib(2).
> >
> > exec: Move S_ISREG() check earlier
> > This moves the S_ISREG() check even earlier than it was already.
> >
> > exec: Move path_noexec() check earlier
> > This adds the path_noexec() check to the same place as the
> > S_ISREG() check.
>
> Thanks.
>
> These don't seem super-urgent and they aren't super-reviewed, so I
> suggest we hold them off until the next cycle?
Agreed; that's fine by me. It's mostly clean up and preparation for
performing future checking through the MAY_EXEC path.
And I'd love to get an Ack from Al or Aleksa, nudge nudge. :)
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists