[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <44b4472d-1d50-c43f-dbb1-953532339fb4@dereferenced.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 05:18:58 -0600 (CST)
From: Ariadne Conill <ariadne@...eferenced.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
cc: Ariadne Conill <ariadne@...eferenced.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/exec: require argv[0] presence in
do_execveat_common()
Hi,
On Tue, 25 Jan 2022, Kees Cook wrote:
>
>
> On January 25, 2022 10:42:41 PM PST, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 04:39:47AM +0000, Ariadne Conill wrote:
>>> The first argument to argv when used with execv family of calls is
>>> required to be the name of the program being executed, per POSIX.
>>>
>>> By validating this in do_execveat_common(), we can prevent execution
>>> of shellcode which invokes execv(2) family syscalls with argc < 1,
>>> a scenario which is disallowed by POSIX, thus providing a mitigation
>>> against CVE-2021-4034 and similar bugs in the future.
>>>
>>> The use of -EFAULT for this case is similar to other systems, such
>>> as FreeBSD and OpenBSD.
>>>
>>> Interestingly, Michael Kerrisk opened an issue about this in 2008,
>
> For v2 please include a URL for this. I assume you mean this one?
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8408
Yes, that's the one. I honestly need to rewrite that commit message
anyway.
>>> but there was no consensus to support fixing this issue then.
>>> Hopefully now that CVE-2021-4034 shows practical exploitative use
>>> of this bug in a shellcode, we can reconsider.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ariadne Conill <ariadne@...eferenced.org>
>>
>> Yup. Agreed. For context:
>> https://www.qualys.com/2022/01/25/cve-2021-4034/pwnkit.txt
>>
>>> ---
>>> fs/exec.c | 4 +++-
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
>>> index 79f2c9483302..de0b832473ed 100644
>>> --- a/fs/exec.c
>>> +++ b/fs/exec.c
>>> @@ -1897,8 +1897,10 @@ static int do_execveat_common(int fd, struct filename *filename,
>>> }
>>>
>>> retval = count(argv, MAX_ARG_STRINGS);
>>> - if (retval < 0)
>>> + if (retval < 1) {
>>> + retval = -EFAULT;
>>> goto out_free;
>>> + }
>
> Actually, no, this needs to be more carefully special-cased to avoid masking error returns from count(). (e.g. -E2BIG would vanish with this patch.)
>
> Perhaps just add:
>
> if (retval == 0) {
> retval = -EFAULT;
> goto out_free;
> }
Alright. I will do that in v2.
>>
>> There shouldn't be anything legitimate actually doing this in userspace.
>
> I spoke too soon.
>
> Unfortunately, this is not the case:
> https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=execve%5C+*%5C%28%5B%5E%2C%5D%2B%2C+*NULL&literal=0
>
> Lots of stuff likes to do:
> execve(path, NULL, NULL);
>
> Do these things depend on argc==0 would be my next question...
I looked at these, and these seem to basically be lazily-written test
cases which should be fixed. I didn't see any example of real-world
applications doing this. As noted in some of the test cases, there are
comments like "Solaris doesn't support this," etc.
So I think having this as a config option at the very least makes a lot of
sense. If users really need to run legacy code where execv() works with
argc < 1, then they could just run a kernel that allows that nonsense,
just like how Linux doesn't necessarily support the old a.out binary
format today, unless it is enabled.
Ariadne
Powered by blists - more mailing lists