linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/9] kernel: add a PF_FORCE

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: <alpine.LNX.2.23.453.2009200745310.6@nippy.intranet>
Date:   Sun, 20 Sep 2020 07:52:38 +1000 (AEST)
From:   Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
cc:     Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@...aro.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:MIPS" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
        Parisc List <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        sparclinux <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux SCSI List <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-aio <linux-aio@...ck.org>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] kernel: add a PF_FORCE_COMPAT flag

On Sat, 19 Sep 2020, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 6:21 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 8:16 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 02:58:22PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > > Said that, why not provide a variant that would take an explicit 
> > > > "is it compat" argument and use it there?  And have the normal one 
> > > > pass in_compat_syscall() to that...
> > >
> > > That would help to not introduce a regression with this series yes. 
> > > But it wouldn't fix existing bugs when io_uring is used to access 
> > > read or write methods that use in_compat_syscall().  One example 
> > > that I recently ran into is drivers/scsi/sg.c.
> 
> Ah, so reading /dev/input/event* would suffer from the same issue, and 
> that one would in fact be broken by your patch in the hypothetical case 
> that someone tried to use io_uring to read /dev/input/event on x32...
> 
> For reference, I checked the socket timestamp handling that has a number 
> of corner cases with time32/time64 formats in compat mode, but none of 
> those appear to be affected by the problem.
> 
> > Aside from the potentially nasty use of per-task variables, one thing 
> > I don't like about PF_FORCE_COMPAT is that it's one-way.  If we're 
> > going to have a generic mechanism for this, shouldn't we allow a full 
> > override of the syscall arch instead of just allowing forcing compat 
> > so that a compat syscall can do a non-compat operation?
> 
> The only reason it's needed here is that the caller is in a kernel 
> thread rather than a system call. Are there any possible scenarios where 
> one would actually need the opposite?
> 

Quite possibly. The ext4 vs. compat getdents bug is still unresolved. 
Please see,
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAFEAcA9W+JK7_TrtTnL1P2ES1knNPJX9wcUvhfLwxLq9augq1w@mail.gmail.com/

>        Arnd
>