linux-kernel - Re: Kernel stack read with PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT and io

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: <87h7hpbojt.fsf@disp2133>
Date:   Tue, 22 Jun 2021 16:02:46 -0500
From:   ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@...il.com>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
        alpha <linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Ley Foon Tan <ley.foon.tan@...el.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: Kernel stack read with PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT and io_uring threads

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 4:23 PM Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>         How would it help e.g. oopsen on the way out of timer interrupts?
>> IMO we simply shouldn't allow ptrace access if the tracee is in that kind
>> of state, on any architecture...
>
> Yeah no, we can't do the "wait for ptrace" when the exit is due to an
> oops. Although honestly, we have other cases like that where do_exit()
> isn't 100% robust if you kill something in an interrupt. Like all the
> locks it leaves locked etc.
>
> So do_exit() from a timer interrupt is going to cause problems
> regardless. I agree it's probably a good idea to try to avoid causing
> even more with the odd ptrace thing, but I don't think ptrace_event is
> some really "fundamental" problem at that point - it's just one detail
> among many many.
>
> So I was more thinking of the debug patch for m68k to catch all the
> _regular_ cases, and all the other random cases of ptrace_event() or
> ptrace_notify().
>
> Although maybe we've really caught them all. The exit case was clearly
> missing, and the thread fork case was scrogged. There are patches for
> the known problems. The patches I really don't like are the
> verification ones to find any unknown ones..

We still have nios2 which copied the m68k logic at some point.  I think
that is a processor that is still ``shipping'' and that people might
still be using in new designs.

I haven't looked closely enough to see what the other architectures with
caller saved registers are doing.

The challenging ones are /proc/pid/syscall and seccomp which want to see
all of the system call arguments.  I think every architecture always
saves the system call arguments unconditionally, so those cases are
probably not as interesting.  But they certain look like they could be
trouble.

Eric