| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20211210184551.GB2242@kbox>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:45:51 -0800
From: Beau Belgrave <beaub@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: rostedt@...dmis.org, linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 13/13] user_events: Use __get_rel_str for relative
string fields
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 10:23:27AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hi Beau,
>
> On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 14:32:10 -0800
> Beau Belgrave <beaub@...ux.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> > Switch between __get_str and __get_rel_str within the print_fmt of
> > user_events. Add unit test to ensure print_fmt is correct on known
> > types.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Beau Belgrave <beaub@...ux.microsoft.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c | 24 ++-
> > .../selftests/user_events/ftrace_test.c | 166 ++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 182 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c
> > index 56eb58ddb4cf..3779fa2ca14a 100644
> > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c
> > @@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ static int user_event_add_field(struct user_event *user, const char *type,
> > goto add_field;
> >
> > add_validator:
> > - if (strstr(type, "char[") != 0)
> > + if (strstr(type, "char") != 0)
> > validator_flags |= VALIDATOR_ENSURE_NULL;
>
> What is this change for? This seems not related to the other changes.
> (Also, what happen if it is a single char type?)
>
I'm glad you asked, it appears like __data_loc / __rel_loc can take char
as it's type (It doesn't appear to be limited to char[] cases). I wanted
to ensure something malicious couldn't sneak past by using this corner
case.
IE: __data_loc char test
In trace_events_filter.c:
int filter_assign_type(const char *type)
{
if (strstr(type, "__data_loc") && strstr(type, "char"))
return FILTER_DYN_STRING;
if (strchr(type, '[') && strstr(type, "char"))
return FILTER_STATIC_STRING;
if (strcmp(type, "char *") == 0 || strcmp(type, "const char *") == 0)
return FILTER_PTR_STRING;
return FILTER_OTHER;
}
char[ is only checked if __data_loc is not specified.
> >
> > validator = kmalloc(sizeof(*validator), GFP_KERNEL);
> > @@ -456,14 +456,21 @@ static const char *user_field_format(const char *type)
> > return "%llu";
> > }
> >
> > -static bool user_field_is_dyn_string(const char *type)
> > +static bool user_field_is_dyn_string(const char *type, const char **str_func)
> > {
> > - if (str_has_prefix(type, "__data_loc ") ||
> > - str_has_prefix(type, "__rel_loc "))
> > - if (strstr(type, "char[") != 0)
> > - return true;
> > + if (str_has_prefix(type, "__data_loc ")) {
> > + *str_func = "__get_str";
> > + goto check;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (str_has_prefix(type, "__rel_loc ")) {
> > + *str_func = "__get_rel_str";
> > + goto check;
> > + }
> >
> > return false;
> > +check:
> > + return strstr(type, "char") != 0;
> > }
> >
> > #define LEN_OR_ZERO (len ? len - pos : 0)
> > @@ -472,6 +479,7 @@ static int user_event_set_print_fmt(struct user_event *user, char *buf, int len)
> > struct ftrace_event_field *field, *next;
> > struct list_head *head = &user->fields;
> > int pos = 0, depth = 0;
> > + const char *str_func;
> >
> > pos += snprintf(buf + pos, LEN_OR_ZERO, "\"");
> >
> > @@ -488,9 +496,9 @@ static int user_event_set_print_fmt(struct user_event *user, char *buf, int len)
> > pos += snprintf(buf + pos, LEN_OR_ZERO, "\"");
> >
> > list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(field, next, head, link) {
> > - if (user_field_is_dyn_string(field->type))
> > + if (user_field_is_dyn_string(field->type, &str_func))
> > pos += snprintf(buf + pos, LEN_OR_ZERO,
> > - ", __get_str(%s)", field->name);
> > + ", %s(%s)", str_func, field->name);
> > else
> > pos += snprintf(buf + pos, LEN_OR_ZERO,
> > ", REC->%s", field->name);
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/user_events/ftrace_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/user_events/ftrace_test.c
>
> Just a nitpick, if possible, please split this part from the kernel update.
>
I will try to do so, could you help me understand why I would split this
out? (For future patches)
I thought the intention of each would be to contain it's logical grouping:
I wanted to show, yes the code changed, and yes we have a unit test for
that new condition.
> > index 16aff1fb295a..b2e5c0765a68 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/user_events/ftrace_test.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/user_events/ftrace_test.c
> > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ const char *data_file = "/sys/kernel/debug/tracing/user_events_data";
> > const char *status_file = "/sys/kernel/debug/tracing/user_events_status";
> > const char *enable_file = "/sys/kernel/debug/tracing/events/user_events/__test_event/enable";
> > const char *trace_file = "/sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace";
> > +const char *fmt_file = "/sys/kernel/debug/tracing/events/user_events/__test_event/format";
> >
> > static int trace_bytes(void)
> > {
> > @@ -47,6 +48,61 @@ static int trace_bytes(void)
> > return bytes;
> > }
> >
> > +static int get_print_fmt(char *buffer, int len)
> > +{
> > + FILE *fp = fopen(fmt_file, "r");
> > + int c, index = 0, last = 0;
> > +
> > + if (!fp)
> > + return -1;
> > +
> > + /* Read until empty line (Skip Common) */
> > + while (true) {
> > + c = getc(fp);
> > +
> > + if (c == EOF)
> > + break;
> > +
> > + if (last == '\n' && c == '\n')
> > + break;
> > +
> > + last = c;
> > + }
>
> Another nitpick, maybe you need a function like skip_until_empty_line(fp)
> and repeat it like this.
>
> if (skip_until_empty_line(fp) < 0)
> goto out;
> if (skip_until_empty_line(fp) < 0)
> goto out;
>
Sure thing.
> > +
> > + last = 0;
> > +
> > + /* Read until empty line (Skip Properties) */
> > + while (true) {
> > + c = getc(fp);
> > +
> > + if (c == EOF)
> > + break;
> > +
> > + if (last == '\n' && c == '\n')
> > + break;
> > +
> > + last = c;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Read in print_fmt: */
> > + while (len > 1) {
> > + c = getc(fp);
> > +
> > + if (c == EOF || c == '\n')
> > + break;
> > +
> > + buffer[index++] = c;
> > +
> > + len--;
> > + }
>
> And here you can use fgets(buffer, len, fp).
>
Makes sense.
>
> Thank you,
>
>
[..]
>
> --
> Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Thanks,
-Beau
Powered by blists - more mailing lists