linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 01/14] userfaultfd: set dirty and young on writeprotect

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: <69022bad-d6f1-d830-224d-eb8e5c90d5c7@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Jul 2022 21:33:35 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc:     Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
        Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
        Nick Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/14] userfaultfd: set dirty and young on
 writeprotect

On 20.07.22 21:15, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 05:10:37PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> For pagecache pages it may as well be *plain wrong* to bypass the write
>> fault handler and simply mark pages dirty+map them writable.
> 
> Could you elaborate?

Write-fault handling for some filesystems (that even require this
"slow path") is a bit special.

For example, do_shared_fault() might have to call page_mkwrite().

AFAIK file systems use that for lazy allocation of disk blocks.
If you simply go ahead and map a !dirty pagecache page writable
and mark it dirty, it will not trigger page_mkwrite() and you might
end up corrupting data.

That's why we the old change_pte_range() code never touched
anything if the pte wasn't already dirty. Because as long as it's not writable,
the FS might have to be informed about the write-unprotect.

And we end up in the case here for VM_SHARED with vma_wants_writenotify().
Where we, for example, check

/* The backer wishes to know when pages are first written to? *
if (vm_ops && (vm_ops->page_mkwrite || vm_ops->pfn_mkwrite))$
	return 1;

Long story short, we should be really careful with write-fault handler bypasses,
especially when deciding to set dirty bits. For pagecache pages, we have to be
especially careful.

For exclusive anon pages it's mostly ok, because wp_page_reuse()
doesn't really contain that much magic. The only thing to consider for ordinary
mprotect() is that there is -- IMHO -- absolutely no guarantee that someone will
write to a specific write-unprotected page soon. For uffd-wp-unprotect it might be
easier to guess, especially, if we un-protect only a single page.

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb