| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 11:22:23 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Rodrigo Campos <rodrigo@...volk.io>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@...hat.com>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Alban Crequy <alban@...volk.io>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] seccomp: Add wait_killable semantic to seccomp
user notifier
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 07:31:12PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> This introduces a per-filter flag (SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_WAIT_KILLABLE_RECV)
> that makes it so that when notifications are received by the supervisor
> the notifying process will transition to wait killable semantics. Although
> wait killable isn't a set of semantics formally exposed to userspace,
> the concept is searchable. If the notifying process is signaled prior
> to the notification being received by the userspace agent, it will
> be handled as normal.
>
> One quirk about how this is handled is that the notifying process
> only switches to TASK_KILLABLE if it receives a wakeup from either
> an addfd or a signal. This is to avoid an unnecessary wakeup of
> the notifying task.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>
> ---
> .../userspace-api/seccomp_filter.rst | 8 ++++
> include/linux/seccomp.h | 3 +-
> include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h | 2 +
> kernel/seccomp.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++-
> 4 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/userspace-api/seccomp_filter.rst b/Documentation/userspace-api/seccomp_filter.rst
> index 539e9d4a4860..204cf5ba511a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/userspace-api/seccomp_filter.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/seccomp_filter.rst
> @@ -271,6 +271,14 @@ notifying process it will be replaced. The supervisor can also add an FD, and
> respond atomically by using the ``SECCOMP_ADDFD_FLAG_SEND`` flag and the return
> value will be the injected file descriptor number.
>
> +The notifying process can be preempted, resulting in the notification being
> +aborted. This can be problematic when trying to take actions on behalf of the
> +notifying process that are long-running and typically retryable (mounting a
> +filesytem). Alternatively, the at filter installation time, the
typo: "the at" -> "at"
> +``SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_WAIT_KILLABLE_RECV`` flag can be set. This flag makes it
> +such that when a user notification is received by the supervisor, the notifying
> +process will ignore non-fatal signals until the response is sent.
> +
> It is worth noting that ``struct seccomp_data`` contains the values of register
> arguments to the syscall, but does not contain pointers to memory. The task's
> memory is accessible to suitably privileged traces via ``ptrace()`` or
> diff --git a/include/linux/seccomp.h b/include/linux/seccomp.h
> index 0c564e5d40ff..d31d76be4982 100644
> --- a/include/linux/seccomp.h
> +++ b/include/linux/seccomp.h
> @@ -8,7 +8,8 @@
> SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_LOG | \
> SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_SPEC_ALLOW | \
> SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER | \
> - SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC_ESRCH)
> + SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC_ESRCH | \
> + SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_WAIT_KILLABLE_RECV)
>
> /* sizeof() the first published struct seccomp_notif_addfd */
> #define SECCOMP_NOTIFY_ADDFD_SIZE_VER0 24
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h b/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> index 78074254ab98..0fdc6ef02b94 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> @@ -23,6 +23,8 @@
> #define SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_SPEC_ALLOW (1UL << 2)
> #define SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER (1UL << 3)
> #define SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC_ESRCH (1UL << 4)
> +/* Received notifications wait in killable state (only respond to fatal signals) */
> +#define SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_WAIT_KILLABLE_RECV (1UL << 5)
>
> /*
> * All BPF programs must return a 32-bit value.
> diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c
> index db10e73d06e0..9291b0843cb2 100644
> --- a/kernel/seccomp.c
> +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c
> @@ -201,6 +201,8 @@ static inline void seccomp_cache_prepare(struct seccomp_filter *sfilter)
> * the filter can be freed.
> * @cache: cache of arch/syscall mappings to actions
> * @log: true if all actions except for SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW should be logged
> + * @wait_killable_recv: Put notifying process in killable state once the
> + * notification is received by the userspace listener.
> * @prev: points to a previously installed, or inherited, filter
> * @prog: the BPF program to evaluate
> * @notif: the struct that holds all notification related information
> @@ -221,6 +223,7 @@ struct seccomp_filter {
> refcount_t refs;
> refcount_t users;
> bool log;
> + bool wait_killable_recv;
> struct action_cache cache;
> struct seccomp_filter *prev;
> struct bpf_prog *prog;
> @@ -894,6 +897,10 @@ static long seccomp_attach_filter(unsigned int flags,
> if (flags & SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_LOG)
> filter->log = true;
>
> + /* Set wait killable flag, if present. */
> + if (flags & SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_WAIT_KILLABLE_RECV)
> + filter->wait_killable_recv = true;
> +
> /*
> * If there is an existing filter, make it the prev and don't drop its
> * task reference.
> @@ -1081,6 +1088,12 @@ static void seccomp_handle_addfd(struct seccomp_kaddfd *addfd, struct seccomp_kn
> complete(&addfd->completion);
> }
>
> +static bool should_sleep_killable(struct seccomp_filter *match,
> + struct seccomp_knotif *n)
> +{
> + return match->wait_killable_recv && n->state == SECCOMP_NOTIFY_SENT;
> +}
> +
> static int seccomp_do_user_notification(int this_syscall,
> struct seccomp_filter *match,
> const struct seccomp_data *sd)
> @@ -1111,11 +1124,25 @@ static int seccomp_do_user_notification(int this_syscall,
> * This is where we wait for a reply from userspace.
> */
> do {
> + bool wait_killable = should_sleep_killable(match, &n);
> +
> mutex_unlock(&match->notify_lock);
> - err = wait_for_completion_interruptible(&n.ready);
> + if (wait_killable)
> + err = wait_for_completion_killable(&n.ready);
> + else
> + err = wait_for_completion_interruptible(&n.ready);
> mutex_lock(&match->notify_lock);
> - if (err != 0)
> +
> + if (err != 0) {
> + /*
> + * Check to see if the notifcation got picked up and
> + * whether we should switch to wait killable.
> + */
> + if (!wait_killable && should_sleep_killable(match, &n))
> + continue;
> +
> goto interrupted;
> + }
>
> addfd = list_first_entry_or_null(&n.addfd,
> struct seccomp_kaddfd, list);
> @@ -1485,6 +1512,9 @@ static long seccomp_notify_recv(struct seccomp_filter *filter,
> mutex_lock(&filter->notify_lock);
> knotif = find_notification(filter, unotif.id);
> if (knotif) {
> + /* Reset the process to make sure it's not stuck */
> + if (should_sleep_killable(filter, knotif))
> + complete(&knotif->ready);
> knotif->state = SECCOMP_NOTIFY_INIT;
> up(&filter->notif->request);
> }
> @@ -1830,6 +1860,14 @@ static long seccomp_set_mode_filter(unsigned int flags,
> ((flags & SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC_ESRCH) == 0))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> + /*
> + * The SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_WAIT_KILLABLE_SENT flag doesn't make sense
> + * without the SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER flag.
> + */
> + if ((flags & SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_WAIT_KILLABLE_RECV) &&
> + ((flags & SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER) == 0))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> /* Prepare the new filter before holding any locks. */
> prepared = seccomp_prepare_user_filter(filter);
> if (IS_ERR(prepared))
Otherwise, looks good. Thanks for bringing this back up!
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists