From: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
To: "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@igalia.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
sonicadvance1@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
kernel-dev@igalia.com, kernel@gpiccoli.net, oleg@redhat.com,
yzaikin@google.com, mcgrof@kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, brauner@kernel.org,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, willy@infradead.org,
dave@stgolabs.net, joshua@froggi.es
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce a way to expose the interpreted file with binfmt_misc
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 12:29:30 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871qctwlpx.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8dc5069f-5642-cc5b-60e0-0ed3789c780b@igalia.com> (Guilherme G. Piccoli's message of "Mon, 13 Nov 2023 14:33:13 -0300")
"Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@igalia.com> writes:
> On 09/10/2023 14:37, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 02:07:16PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 07.09.23 22:24, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
>>>> Currently the kernel provides a symlink to the executable binary, in the
>>>> form of procfs file exe_file (/proc/self/exe_file for example). But what
>>>> happens in interpreted scenarios (like binfmt_misc) is that such link
>>>> always points to the *interpreter*. For cases of Linux binary emulators,
>>>> like FEX [0] for example, it's then necessary to somehow mask that and
>>>> emulate the true binary path.
>>>
>>> I'm absolutely no expert on that, but I'm wondering if, instead of modifying
>>> exe_file and adding an interpreter file, you'd want to leave exe_file alone
>>> and instead provide an easier way to obtain the interpreted file.
>>>
>>> Can you maybe describe why modifying exe_file is desired (about which
>>> consumers are we worrying? ) and what exactly FEX does to handle that (how
>>> does it mask that?).
>>>
>>> So a bit more background on the challenges without this change would be
>>> appreciated.
>>
>> Yeah, it sounds like you're dealing with a process that examines
>> /proc/self/exe_file for itself only to find the binfmt_misc interpreter
>> when it was run via binfmt_misc?
>>
>> What actually breaks? Or rather, why does the process to examine
>> exe_file? I'm just trying to see if there are other solutions here that
>> would avoid creating an ambiguous interface...
>>
>
> Thanks Kees and David! Did Ryan's thorough comment addressed your
> questions? Do you have any take on the TODOs?
>
> I can maybe rebase against 6.7-rc1 and resubmit , if that makes sense!
> But would be better having the TODOs addressed, I guess.
Currently there is a mechanism in the kernel for changing
/proc/self/exe. Would that be reasonable to use in this case?
It came from the checkpoint/restart work, but given that it is already
implemented it seems like the path of least resistance to get your
binfmt_misc that wants to look like binfmt_elf to use that mechanism.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-13 18:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-07 20:24 Guilherme G. Piccoli
2023-09-07 20:24 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] binfmt_misc, fork, proc: Introduce flag to expose the interpreted binary in procfs Guilherme G. Piccoli
2023-09-07 20:24 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] fork, procfs: Introduce /proc/self/interpreter symlink Guilherme G. Piccoli
2023-10-06 7:51 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce a way to expose the interpreted file with binfmt_misc Guilherme G. Piccoli
2023-10-06 12:07 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-10-09 17:37 ` Kees Cook
2023-10-11 23:53 ` Ryan Houdek
2023-11-13 17:33 ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2023-11-13 18:29 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2023-11-13 19:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-11-14 16:11 ` Eric W. Biederman
2023-11-14 16:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-11-13 19:17 ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=871qctwlpx.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=gpiccoli@igalia.com \
--cc=joshua@froggi.es \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-dev@igalia.com \
--cc=kernel@gpiccoli.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=sonicadvance1@gmail.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yzaikin@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox