[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABFFF2B-CC60-48AA-98B2-56E59A717785@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2023 15:04:06 +0000
From: Junxiao Bi <junxiao.bi@...cle.com>
To: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
"nathanl@...ux.ibm.com" <nathanl@...ux.ibm.com>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"jmorris@...ei.org" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"serge@...lyn.com" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Joe Jin <joe.jin@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] debugfs: allow access blktrace trace files in lockdown
mode
> On Apr 19, 2023, at 11:00 AM, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 1:27 PM Junxiao Bi <junxiao.bi@...cle.com> wrote:
>>
>> blktrace trace files are per-cpu relay files that are used by kernel to
>> export IO metadata(IO events, type, target disk, offset and len etc.) to
>> userspace, no data from IO itself will be exported. These trace files have
>> permission 0400, but mmap is supported, so they are blocked by lockdown.
>> Skip lockdown for these files to allow blktrace work in lockdown mode.
>>
>> v3 <- v2:
>> allow only blktrace trace file instead of relay files
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/b68c9e1d-71c8-adf9-f7da-1b56a3d4bfbc@oracle.com/T/
>>
>> v2 <- v1:
>> Fix build error when CONFIG_RELAY is not defined.
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202304121714.6mahd9EW-lkp@intel.com/
>> Signed-off-by: Junxiao Bi <junxiao.bi@...cle.com>
>> ---
>> fs/debugfs/file.c | 10 ++++++++++
>> include/linux/blktrace_api.h | 3 +++
>> include/linux/relay.h | 3 +++
>> kernel/relay.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>> kernel/trace/blktrace.c | 7 +++++++
>> 5 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/debugfs/file.c b/fs/debugfs/file.c
>> index 1f971c880dde..973e38f3e8a1 100644
>> --- a/fs/debugfs/file.c
>> +++ b/fs/debugfs/file.c
>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>> #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>> #include <linux/poll.h>
>> #include <linux/security.h>
>> +#include <linux/blktrace_api.h>
>>
>> #include "internal.h"
>>
>> @@ -142,6 +143,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(debugfs_file_put);
>> * Only permit access to world-readable files when the kernel is locked down.
>> * We also need to exclude any file that has ways to write or alter it as root
>> * can bypass the permissions check.
>> + * Exception:
>> + * blktrace trace files are per-cpu relay files that are used by kernel to
>> + * export IO metadata(IO events, type, target disk, offset and len etc.) to
>> + * userspace, no data from IO itself will be exported. These trace files have
>> + * permission 0400, but mmap is supported, so they are blocked by lockdown.
>> + * Skip lockdown for these files to allow blktrace work in lockdown mode.
>> */
>> static int debugfs_locked_down(struct inode *inode,
>> struct file *filp,
>> @@ -154,6 +161,9 @@ static int debugfs_locked_down(struct inode *inode,
>> !real_fops->mmap)
>> return 0;
>>
>> + if (blk_trace_is_tracefile(inode, real_fops))
>> + return 0;
>
> I think it would be a little more foolproof if we made the connection
> to lockdown a bit more explicit in the relay/blktrace code. How about
> something like this here, borrowing your previously defined
> 'is_relay_file()' function:
>
> if (is_relay_file(real_fops) && relay_bypass_lockdown(inode, real_fops))
> return 0;
>
> ... and in the relay code we would have something like this, borrowing
> from your logic in this patch, and using some shortcut-y pseudo-code:
>
> bool relay_bypass_lockdown(struct inode *inode,
> const struct file_operations *fops)
> {
> struct rchan_buf *buf = inode->i_private;
>
> if (buf->chan->cb->bypass_lockdown)
> return buf->chan->cb->bypass_lockdown(inode);
>
> return false;
> }
>
> ... where in the case of blktrace rchan_callbacks::bypass_lockdown
> would be a simple "true", assuming it is safe to do so (we need some
> ACKs from the blktrace folks):
>
> bool blk_trace_bypass_lockdown(struct inode *inode)
> {
> return true;
> }
Good idea. Will make a new version for it. Thanks.
>
> --
> paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists