linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 10/11] seccomp: Switch addfd to Extensible Argument ioctl

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]

Date:   Tue, 16 Jun 2020 09:05:29 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
        Matt Denton <mpdenton@...gle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Chris Palmer <palmer@...gle.com>,
        Robert Sesek <rsesek@...gle.com>,
        Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@...hat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/11] seccomp: Switch addfd to Extensible Argument
 ioctl

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 08:55:46AM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 08:25:23PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > This patch is based on discussions[1] with Sargun Dhillon, Christian
> > Brauner, and David Laight. Instead of building size into the addfd
> > structure, make it a function of the ioctl command (which is how sizes are
> > normally passed to ioctls). To support forward and backward compatibility,
> > just mask out the direction and size, and match everything. The size (and
> > any future direction) checks are done along with copy_struct_from_user()
> > logic. Also update the selftests to check size bounds.
> > 
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200612104629.GA15814@ircssh-2.c.rugged-nimbus-611.internal
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> > ---
> >  include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h                  |  2 -
> >  kernel/seccomp.c                              | 21 ++++++----
> >  tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++---
> >  3 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h b/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> > index c347160378e5..473a61695ac3 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> > @@ -118,7 +118,6 @@ struct seccomp_notif_resp {
> >  
> >  /**
> >   * struct seccomp_notif_addfd
> > - * @size: The size of the seccomp_notif_addfd structure
> >   * @id: The ID of the seccomp notification
> >   * @flags: SECCOMP_ADDFD_FLAG_*
> >   * @srcfd: The local fd number
> > @@ -126,7 +125,6 @@ struct seccomp_notif_resp {
> >   * @newfd_flags: The O_* flags the remote FD should have applied
> >   */
> >  struct seccomp_notif_addfd {
> > -	__u64 size;
> 
> Huh? Won't this break builds?

Only if they use addfd without this patch? :) Are you saying I should
collapse this patch into the main addfd and test patches?

-- 
Kees Cook