linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] Add UFFD_USER_MODE

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: <CA+EESO7xnnJAsPneuy1dNj6F47gViGiL-z8rajY5EoGdFWs+-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:17:43 -0800
From:   Lokesh Gidra <lokeshgidra@...gle.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@...col.org>,
        "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>,
        Calin Juravle <calin@...gle.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@...gle.com>,
        "Cc: Android Kernel" <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Shaohua Li <shli@...com>, Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Nitin Gupta <nigupta@...dia.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        linux-mm@...ck.kernel.org, Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>,
        "open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] Add UFFD_USER_MODE_ONLY

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:33 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 19:04:10 -0800 Lokesh Gidra <lokeshgidra@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > userfaultfd handles page faults from both user and kernel code.
> > Add a new UFFD_USER_MODE_ONLY flag for userfaultfd(2) that makes
> > the resulting userfaultfd object refuse to handle faults from kernel
> > mode, treating these faults as if SIGBUS were always raised, causing
> > the kernel code to fail with EFAULT.
> >
> > A future patch adds a knob allowing administrators to give some
> > processes the ability to create userfaultfd file objects only if they
> > pass UFFD_USER_MODE_ONLY, reducing the likelihood that these processes
> > will exploit userfaultfd's ability to delay kernel page faults to open
> > timing windows for future exploits.
>
> Can we assume that an update to the userfaultfd(2) manpage is in the
> works?
>
Yes, I'm working on it. Can the kernel version which will have these
patches be known now so that I can mention it in the manpage?

> > --- a/fs/userfaultfd.c
> > +++ b/fs/userfaultfd.c
> > @@ -405,6 +405,13 @@ vm_fault_t handle_userfault(struct vm_fault *vmf, unsigned long reason)
> >
> >       if (ctx->features & UFFD_FEATURE_SIGBUS)
> >               goto out;
> > +     if ((vmf->flags & FAULT_FLAG_USER) == 0 &&
> > +         ctx->flags & UFFD_USER_MODE_ONLY) {
> > +             printk_once(KERN_WARNING "uffd: Set unprivileged_userfaultfd "
> > +                     "sysctl knob to 1 if kernel faults must be handled "
> > +                     "without obtaining CAP_SYS_PTRACE capability\n");
> > +             goto out;
> > +     }
> >
> >       /*
> >        * If it's already released don't get it. This avoids to loop
> > @@ -1965,10 +1972,11 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(userfaultfd, int, flags)
> >       BUG_ON(!current->mm);
> >
> >       /* Check the UFFD_* constants for consistency.  */
> > +     BUILD_BUG_ON(UFFD_USER_MODE_ONLY & UFFD_SHARED_FCNTL_FLAGS);
>
> Are we sure this is true for all architectures?

Yes, none of the architectures are using the least-significant bit for
O_CLOEXEC or O_NONBLOCK.
>
> >       BUILD_BUG_ON(UFFD_CLOEXEC != O_CLOEXEC);
> >       BUILD_BUG_ON(UFFD_NONBLOCK != O_NONBLOCK);
> >
> > -     if (flags & ~UFFD_SHARED_FCNTL_FLAGS)
> > +     if (flags & ~(UFFD_SHARED_FCNTL_FLAGS | UFFD_USER_MODE_ONLY))
> >               return -EINVAL;
> >
> >       ctx = kmem_cache_alloc(userfaultfd_ctx_cachep, GFP_KERNEL);
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h b/include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h
> > index e7e98bde221f..5f2d88212f7c 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h
> > @@ -257,4 +257,13 @@ struct uffdio_writeprotect {
> >       __u64 mode;
> >  };
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Flags for the userfaultfd(2) system call itself.
> > + */
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Create a userfaultfd that can handle page faults only in user mode.
> > + */
> > +#define UFFD_USER_MODE_ONLY 1
> > +
> >  #endif /* _LINUX_USERFAULTFD_H */
>
> It would be nice to define this in include/linux/userfaultfd_k.h,
> alongside the other flags.  But I guess it has to be here because it's
> part of the userspace API.