[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a57e5120-866c-0b27-8203-0632edda2717@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 14:47:46 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Greg Ungerer <gerg@...ux-m68k.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
Chinwen Chang <chinwen.chang@...iatek.com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
Kevin Brodsky <Kevin.Brodsky@....com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Shawn Anastasio <shawn@...stas.io>,
Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...labora.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
Nicolas Viennot <Nicolas.Viennot@...sigma.com>,
Thomas Cedeno <thomascedeno@...gle.com>,
Collin Fijalkovich <cfijalkovich@...gle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@...ernel.net>,
Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@...il.com>,
linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/7] Remove in-tree usage of MAP_DENYWRITE
On 12.08.21 14:20, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * David Hildenbrand:
>
>> There are some (minor) user-visible changes with this series:
>> 1. We no longer deny write access to shared libaries loaded via legacy
>> uselib(); this behavior matches modern user space e.g., via dlopen().
>> 2. We no longer deny write access to the elf interpreter after exec
>> completed, treating it just like shared libraries (which it often is).
>
> We have a persistent issue with people using cp (or similar tools) to
> replace system libraries. Since the file is truncated first, all
> relocations and global data are replaced by file contents, result in
> difficult-to-diagnose crashes. It would be nice if we had a way to
> prevent this mistake. It doesn't have to be MAP_DENYWRITE or MAP_COPY.
> It could be something completely new, like an option that turns every
> future access beyond the truncation point into a signal (rather than
> getting bad data or bad code and crashing much later).
>
> I don't know how many invalid copy operations are currently thwarted by
> the current program interpreter restriction. I doubt that lifting the
> restriction matters.
>
>> 3. We always deny write access to the file linked via /proc/pid/exe:
>> sys_prctl(PR_SET_MM_EXE_FILE) will fail if write access to the file
>> cannot be denied, and write access to the file will remain denied
>> until the link is effectivel gone (exec, termination,
>> PR_SET_MM_EXE_FILE) -- just as if exec'ing the file.
>>
>> I was wondering if we really care about permanently disabling write access
>> to the executable, or if it would be good enough to just disable write
>> access while loading the new executable during exec; but I don't know
>> the history of that -- and it somewhat makes sense to deny write access
>> at least to the main executable. With modern user space -- dlopen() -- we
>> can effectively modify the content of shared libraries while being used.
>
> Is there a difference between ET_DYN and ET_EXEC executables?
No, I don't think so. When exec'ing, the main executable will see a
deny_write_access(file); AFAIKT, that can either be ET_DYN or ET_EXEC.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists