[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y4j8g/V4HGgamyLI@sol.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2022 11:12:03 -0800
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>,
dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com, paul@...l-moore.com, jmorris@...ei.org,
serge@...lyn.com, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] evm: Alloc evm_digest in evm_verify_hmac() if
CONFIG_VMAP_STACK=y
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 02:08:58PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-12-01 at 10:53 -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 11:06:24AM +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> > >
> > > Commit ac4e97abce9b8 ("scatterlist: sg_set_buf() argument must be in linear
> > > mapping") checks that both the signature and the digest reside in the
> > > linear mapping area.
> > >
> > > However, more recently commit ba14a194a434c ("fork: Add generic vmalloced
> > > stack support"), made it possible to move the stack in the vmalloc area,
> > > which is not contiguous, and thus not suitable for sg_set_buf() which needs
> > > adjacent pages.
> > >
> > > Fix this by checking if CONFIG_VMAP_STACK is enabled. If yes, allocate an
> > > evm_digest structure, and use that instead of the in-stack cbounterpart.
> > >
> > > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # 4.9.x
> > > Fixes: ba14a194a434 ("fork: Add generic vmalloced stack support")
> > > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> > > ---
> > > security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c b/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c
> > > index 23d484e05e6f..7f76d6103f2e 100644
> > > --- a/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c
> > > +++ b/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c
> > > @@ -174,6 +174,7 @@ static enum integrity_status evm_verify_hmac(struct dentry *dentry,
> > > struct signature_v2_hdr *hdr;
> > > enum integrity_status evm_status = INTEGRITY_PASS;
> > > struct evm_digest digest;
> > > + struct evm_digest *digest_ptr = &digest;
> > > struct inode *inode;
> > > int rc, xattr_len, evm_immutable = 0;
> > >
> > > @@ -231,14 +232,26 @@ static enum integrity_status evm_verify_hmac(struct dentry *dentry,
> > > }
> > >
> > > hdr = (struct signature_v2_hdr *)xattr_data;
> > > - digest.hdr.algo = hdr->hash_algo;
> > > +
> > > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_VMAP_STACK)) {
> > > + digest_ptr = kmalloc(sizeof(*digest_ptr), GFP_NOFS);
> > > + if (!digest_ptr) {
> > > + rc = -ENOMEM;
> > > + break;
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + digest_ptr->hdr.algo = hdr->hash_algo;
> > > +
> > > rc = evm_calc_hash(dentry, xattr_name, xattr_value,
> > > - xattr_value_len, xattr_data->type, &digest);
> > > + xattr_value_len, xattr_data->type,
> > > + digest_ptr);
> > > if (rc)
> > > break;
> > > rc = integrity_digsig_verify(INTEGRITY_KEYRING_EVM,
> > > (const char *)xattr_data, xattr_len,
> > > - digest.digest, digest.hdr.length);
> > > + digest_ptr->digest,
> > > + digest_ptr->hdr.length);
> > > if (!rc) {
> > > inode = d_backing_inode(dentry);
> > >
> > > @@ -268,8 +281,11 @@ static enum integrity_status evm_verify_hmac(struct dentry *dentry,
> > > else
> > > evm_status = INTEGRITY_FAIL;
> > > }
> > > - pr_debug("digest: (%d) [%*phN]\n", digest.hdr.length, digest.hdr.length,
> > > - digest.digest);
> > > + pr_debug("digest: (%d) [%*phN]\n", digest_ptr->hdr.length,
> > > + digest_ptr->hdr.length, digest_ptr->digest);
> > > +
> > > + if (digest_ptr && digest_ptr != &digest)
> > > + kfree(digest_ptr);
> >
> > What is the actual problem here? Where is a scatterlist being created from this
> > buffer? AFAICS it never happens.
>
> Enabling CONFIG_VMAP_STACK is the culprit, which triggers the BUG_ON
> only when CONFIG_DEBUG_SG is enabled as well.
>
> Refer to commit ba14a194a434 ("fork: Add generic vmalloced stack
> support").
I'm asking about where the actual bug is. Where is a scatterlist being created
to represent an on-disk buffer...
- Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists