linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] seccomp: passthrough uretprobe systemcall without filtering

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: <CAHsH6Gtbo39pVjVWbPfSjePPyFYVLWJq9m3HLWgDGp1orvD+GA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 05:36:34 -0800
From: Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, kees@...nel.org, luto@...capital.net, wad@...omium.org, 
	andrii@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, 
	olsajiri@...il.com, cyphar@...har.com, songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com, 
	john.fastabend@...il.com, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de, 
	bp@...en8.de, daniel@...earbox.net, ast@...nel.org, andrii.nakryiko@...il.com, 
	rostedt@...dmis.org, rafi@....io, shmulik.ladkani@...il.com, 
	bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] seccomp: passthrough uretprobe systemcall without filtering

On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 12:02 AM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 02:39:28 +0100
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > On 01/16, Eyal Birger wrote:
> > >
> > > Fixes: ff474a78cef5 ("uprobe: Add uretprobe syscall to speed up return probe")
> > > Reported-by: Rafael Buchbinder <rafi@....io>
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHsH6Gs3Eh8DFU0wq58c_LF8A4_+o6z456J7BidmcVY2AqOnHQ@mail.gmail.com/
> > > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> > ...
> > > @@ -1359,6 +1359,11 @@ int __secure_computing(const struct seccomp_data *sd)
> > >     this_syscall = sd ? sd->nr :
> > >             syscall_get_nr(current, current_pt_regs());
> > >
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > > +   if (unlikely(this_syscall == __NR_uretprobe) && !in_ia32_syscall())
> > > +           return 0;
> > > +#endif
> >
> > Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> >
> >
> > A note for the seccomp maintainers...
> >
> > I don't know what do you think, but I agree in advance that the very fact this
> > patch adds "#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64" into __secure_computing() doesn't look nice.
> >
>
> Indeed. in_ia32_syscall() depends arch/x86 too.
> We can add an inline function like;
>
> ``` uprobes.h
> static inline bool is_uprobe_syscall(int syscall)
> {
>         // arch_is_uprobe_syscall check can be replaced by Kconfig,
>         // something like CONFIG_ARCH_URETPROBE_SYSCALL.
> #ifdef arch_is_uprobe_syscall
>         return arch_is_uprobe_syscall(syscall)
> #else
>         return false;
> #endif
> }
> ```
> and
> ``` arch/x86/include/asm/uprobes.h
> #define arch_is_uprobe_syscall(syscall) \
>         (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_64) && syscall == __NR_uretprobe && !in_ia32_syscall())
> ```

Notice it'll need to be enclosed in ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 as __NR_uretprobe
isn't defined otherwise so the IS_ENABLED isn't needed.

>
> > The problem is that we need a simple patch for -stable which fixes the real
> > problem. We can cleanup this logic later, I think.
>
> Hmm, at least we should make it is_uprobe_syscall() in uprobes.h so that
> do not pollute the seccomp subsystem with #ifdef.

I like this approach.

Notice it does add a couple of includes that weren't there before:
- arch/x86/include/asm/uprobes.h would include asm/unistd.h
- seccomp.c would include linux/uprobes.h

So it's a less "trivial" patch... If that's ok I can repost with these
changes.

Eyal.