linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@gmail.com>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Cc: Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
	linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: prevent a task from writing on its own /proc/*/mem
Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 11:33:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJHCu1+3jcJWSyPE8DsFfaR-NNtG5P=H31cKeDuagx_w1u0urA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAG48ez2N8tjyjGbdh+927uf2A_Xtsie=+DL+GZbvBniiO8jNHw@mail.gmail.com>

2018-05-28 11:06 GMT+02:00 Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>:
> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 4:50 PM, Salvatore Mesoraca
> <s.mesoraca16@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Prevent a task from opening, in "write" mode, any /proc/*/mem
>> file that operates on the task's mm.
>> /proc/*/mem is mainly a debugging means and, as such, it shouldn't
>> be used by the inspected process itself.
>> Current implementation always allow a task to access its own
>> /proc/*/mem file.
>> A process can use it to overwrite read-only memory, making
>> pointless the use of security_file_mprotect() or other ways to
>> enforce RO memory.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/proc/base.c       | 25 ++++++++++++++++++-------
>>  fs/proc/internal.h   |  3 ++-
>>  fs/proc/task_mmu.c   |  4 ++--
>>  fs/proc/task_nommu.c |  2 +-
>>  4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
>> index 1a76d75..01ecfec 100644
>> --- a/fs/proc/base.c
>> +++ b/fs/proc/base.c
>> @@ -762,8 +762,9 @@ static int proc_single_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
>>         .release        = single_release,
>>  };
>>
>> -
>> -struct mm_struct *proc_mem_open(struct inode *inode, unsigned int mode)
>> +struct mm_struct *proc_mem_open(struct inode *inode,
>> +                               unsigned int mode,
>> +                               fmode_t f_mode)
>>  {
>>         struct task_struct *task = get_proc_task(inode);
>>         struct mm_struct *mm = ERR_PTR(-ESRCH);
>> @@ -773,10 +774,20 @@ struct mm_struct *proc_mem_open(struct inode *inode, unsigned int mode)
>>                 put_task_struct(task);
>>
>>                 if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(mm)) {
>> -                       /* ensure this mm_struct can't be freed */
>> -                       mmgrab(mm);
>> -                       /* but do not pin its memory */
>> -                       mmput(mm);
>> +                       /*
>> +                        * Prevent this interface from being used as a mean
>> +                        * to bypass memory restrictions, including those
>> +                        * imposed by LSMs.
>> +                        */
>> +                       if (mm == current->mm &&
>> +                           f_mode & FMODE_WRITE)
>> +                               mm = ERR_PTR(-EACCES);
>> +                       else {
>> +                               /* ensure this mm_struct can't be freed */
>> +                               mmgrab(mm);
>> +                               /* but do not pin its memory */
>> +                               mmput(mm);
>> +                       }
>>                 }
>>         }
>
> I don't have an opinion on the overall patch, but this part looks
> buggy: In the error path, you set `mm` to an error pointer, but you
> still own the reference that mm_access() took on the old `mm`. The
> error path needs to call `mmput(mm)`.

You are absolutely right,

Thank you,

Salvatore

      reply	other threads:[~2018-05-28  9:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-26 14:50 Salvatore Mesoraca
2018-05-26 15:48 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2018-05-26 17:30   ` Salvatore Mesoraca
2018-05-26 17:53     ` Casey Schaufler
2018-05-26 17:58     ` Alexey Dobriyan
2018-05-27  0:31 ` Kees Cook
2018-05-27  1:33   ` Linus Torvalds
2018-05-27 14:41     ` Kees Cook
2018-05-28  9:32     ` Salvatore Mesoraca
2018-05-28  9:06 ` Jann Horn
2018-05-28  9:33   ` Salvatore Mesoraca [this message]

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='CAJHCu1+3jcJWSyPE8DsFfaR-NNtG5P=H31cKeDuagx_w1u0urA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=s.mesoraca16@gmail.com \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=akinobu.mita@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    /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