linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs/binfmt_elf: Fix memsz

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: <CABVgOSm9V37KgiP-eHxfYF4tTT+ZDQKVxEAzh8P0SH3WrECM9A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 12:34:40 +0800
From:   David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Pedro Falcato <pedro.falcato@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, sam@...too.org,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/binfmt_elf: Fix memsz > filesz handling

On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 11:59 AM Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 06, 2022 at 02:16:57AM +0000, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> David, has there been any work on adding a way to instantiate
> userspace VMAs in a KUnit test? I tried to write this myself, but I
> couldn't figure out how to make the userspace memory mappings appear.
> Here's my fumbling attempt:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kees/linux.git/log/?h=devel/kunit/usercopy
>
> I really wish KUnit had userspace mapping support -- I have a bunch of
> unit tests that need to get built up around checking for regressions
> here, etc.

Hi Kees,

Sorry the the delayed response!

Alas, my attempts to get this to work haven't been much more
successful than yours. It's definitely something we'd like to support,
but I confess to not knowing enough about the mm code to know exactly
what would be involved.

The workaround is to load tests as modules, and use something like
Vitor's original patch here:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20200721174036.71072-1-vitor@massaru.org/

Basically, using the existing mm of the module loader. Adapting those
changes to your branch (and fixing a couple of back-to-front KUnit
assertions) does work for me when built as a module, in an x86_64 vm:

root@...cestar:~# modprobe usercopy_kunit
[   52.986290]     # Subtest: usercopy
[   52.986701]     1..1
[   53.246058]     ok 1 - usercopy_test
[   53.246628] ok 1 - usercopy

But getting it to work with built-in tests hasn't been successful so
far. I wondered if we could just piggy-back on init_mm or similar, but
that doesn't seem to work either.

So, in the short-term, this is only possible for modules. If that's
useful enough, we can get Vitor's support patch (or something similar)
in, and just mark any tests module-only (or have them skip if there's
no mm). Because kunit.py only runs built-in tests, though, it's
definitely less convenient.

Cheers,
-- David