From: Sergei Trofimovich <slyich@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uapi: increase MAX_ARG_STRLEN from 128K to 6M
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2023 22:28:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZR3ZEniQLzzRKwqP@nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230924193005.1721655-1-slyich@gmail.com>
On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 08:30:05PM +0100, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> Before the change linux allowed individual execve() arguments or
> environment variable entries to be only as big as 32 pages.
>
> Histroically before b6a2fea3931 "mm: variable length argument support"
> MAX_ARG_STRLEN used to be full allowed size `argv[] + envp[]`.
>
> When full limit was abandoned individual parameters were still limited
> by a safe limit of 128K.
>
> Nowadays' linux allows `argv[]+envp[]` to be as laerge as 6MB (3/4
> `_STK_LIM`).
>
> Some build systems like `autoconf` use a single environment variable
> to pass `CFLAGS` environment variable around. It's not a bug problem
> if the argument list is short.
>
> But some packaging systems prefer installing each package into
> individual directory. As a result that requires quite long string of
> parameters like:
>
> CFLAGS="-I/path/to/pkg1 -I/path/to/pkg2 ..."
>
> This can easily overflow 128K and does happen for `NixOS` and `nixpkgs`
> repositories on a regular basis.
>
> Similar pattern is exhibited by `gcc` which converts it's input command
> line into a single environment variable (https://gcc.gnu.org/PR111527):
>
> $ big_100k_var=$(printf "%0*d" 100000 0)
>
> # this works: 200KB of options for `printf` external command
> $ $(which printf) "%s %s" $big_100k_var $big_100k_var >/dev/null; echo $?
> 0
>
> # this fails: 200KB of options for `gcc`, fails in `cc1`
> $ touch a.c; gcc -c a.c -DA=$big_100k_var -DB=$big_100k_var
> gcc: fatal error: cannot execute 'cc1': execv: Argument list too long
> compilation terminated.
>
> I would say this 128KB limitation is arbitrary.
> The change raises the limit of `MAX_ARG_STRLEN` from 32 pakes (128K
> n `x86_64`) to the maximum limit of stack allowed by Linux today.
>
> It has a minor chance of overflowing userspace programs that use
> `MAX_ARG_STRLEN` to allocate the strings on stack. It should not be a
> big problem as such programs are already are at risk of overflowing
> stack.
>
> Tested as:
> $ V=$(printf "%*d" 1000000 0) ls
>
> Before the change it failed with `ls: Argument list too long`. After the
> change `ls` executes as expected.
>
> WDYT of abandoning the limit and allow user to fill entire environment
> with a single command or a single variable?
>
> CC: Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
> CC: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> CC: linux-mm@kvack.org
> CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Sergei Trofimovich <slyich@gmail.com>
Ping.
Also +CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
in case mm tree is a reasonable place for this change.
> ---
> include/uapi/linux/binfmts.h | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/binfmts.h b/include/uapi/linux/binfmts.h
> index c6f9450efc12..4e828515a22e 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/binfmts.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/binfmts.h
> @@ -8,11 +8,11 @@ struct pt_regs;
>
> /*
> * These are the maximum length and maximum number of strings passed to the
> - * execve() system call. MAX_ARG_STRLEN is essentially random but serves to
> - * prevent the kernel from being unduly impacted by misaddressed pointers.
> + * execve() system call. MAX_ARG_STRLEN is as large as Linux allows new
> + * stack to grow. Currently it's `_STK_LIM / 4 * 3 = 6MB` (see fs/exec.c).
> * MAX_ARG_STRINGS is chosen to fit in a signed 32-bit integer.
> */
> -#define MAX_ARG_STRLEN (PAGE_SIZE * 32)
> +#define MAX_ARG_STRLEN (6 * 1024 * 1024)
> #define MAX_ARG_STRINGS 0x7FFFFFFF
>
> /* sizeof(linux_binprm->buf) */
> --
> 2.42.0
>
--
Sergei
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-04 21:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-24 19:30 Sergei Trofimovich
2023-10-04 21:28 ` Sergei Trofimovich [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=ZR3ZEniQLzzRKwqP@nz \
--to=slyich@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.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