netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/9] kernel: add a PF_FORCE

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: <CAK8P3a3_DL0T33e7CAuyRxgpRy8LaJO9h1sER7sebcX26hVVjA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 18 Sep 2020 15:59:29 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
        Parisc List <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        sparclinux <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux FS-devel Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-aio <linux-aio@...ck.org>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] kernel: add a PF_FORCE_COMPAT flag

On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 3:44 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 02:40:12PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > >     /* Vector 0x110 is LINUX_32BIT_SYSCALL_TRAP */
> > > -   return pt_regs_trap_type(current_pt_regs()) == 0x110;
> > > +   return pt_regs_trap_type(current_pt_regs()) == 0x110 ||
> > > +           (current->flags & PF_FORCE_COMPAT);
> >
> > Can't say I like that approach ;-/  Reasoning about the behaviour is much
> > harder when it's controlled like that - witness set_fs() shite...
>
> I don't particularly like it either.  But do you have a better idea
> how to deal with io_uring vs compat tasks?

Do we need to worry about something other than the compat_iovec
struct for now? Regarding the code in io_import_iovec(), it would
seem that can easily be handled by exposing an internal helper.
Instead of

#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
     if (req->ctx->compat)
            return compat_import_iovec(rw, buf, sqe_len, UIO_FASTIOV,
iovec, iter);
#endif
        return import_iovec(rw, buf, sqe_len, UIO_FASTIOV, iovec, iter);

This could do

    __import_iovec(rw, buf, sqe_len, UIO_FASTIOV, iovec,
                     iter, req->ctx->compat);

With the normal import_iovec() becoming a trivial wrapper around
the same thing:

ssize_t import_iovec(int type, const struct iovec __user * uvector,
                 unsigned nr_segs, unsigned fast_segs,
                 struct iovec **iov, struct iov_iter *i)
{
     return __import_iovec(type, uvector, nr_segs, fast_segs, iov,
              i, in_compat_syscall());
}


         Arnd