From: Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@gmail.com>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>, Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: BTI interaction between seccomp filters in systemd and glibc mprotect calls, causing service failures
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 18:39:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ed3407a9-8479-edf7-23eb-5354e77d2a58@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201026162410.GB27285@arm.com>
On 26.10.2020 18.24, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 10:44:46PM -0500, Jeremy Linton via Libc-alpha wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> There is a problem with glibc+systemd on BTI enabled systems. Systemd
>> has a service flag "MemoryDenyWriteExecute" which uses seccomp to deny
>> PROT_EXEC changes. Glibc enables BTI only on segments which are marked as
>> being BTI compatible by calling mprotect PROT_EXEC|PROT_BTI. That call is
>> caught by the seccomp filter, resulting in service failures.
>>
>> So, at the moment one has to pick either denying PROT_EXEC changes, or BTI.
>> This is obviously not desirable.
>>
>> Various changes have been suggested, replacing the mprotect with mmap calls
>> having PROT_BTI set on the original mapping, re-mmapping the segments,
>> implying PROT_EXEC on mprotect PROT_BTI calls when VM_EXEC is already set,
>> and various modification to seccomp to allow particular mprotect cases to
>> bypass the filters. In each case there seems to be an undesirable attribute
>> to the solution.
>>
>> So, whats the best solution?
>
> Unrolling this discussion a bit, this problem comes from a few sources:
>
> 1) systemd is trying to implement a policy that doesn't fit SECCOMP
> syscall filtering very well.
>
> 2) The program is trying to do something not expressible through the
> syscall interface: really the intent is to set PROT_BTI on the page,
> with no intent to set PROT_EXEC on any page that didn't already have it
> set.
>
>
> This limitation of mprotect() was known when I originally added PROT_BTI,
> but at that time we weren't aware of a clear use case that would fail.
>
>
> Would it now help to add something like:
>
> int mchangeprot(void *addr, size_t len, int old_flags, int new_flags)
> {
> int ret = -EINVAL;
> mmap_write_lock(current->mm);
> if (all vmas in [addr .. addr + len) have
> their mprotect flags set to old_flags) {
>
> ret = mprotect(addr, len, new_flags);
> }
>
> mmap_write_unlock(current->mm);
> return ret;
> }
>
>
> libc would now be able to do
>
> mchangeprot(addr, len, PROT_EXEC | PROT_READ,
> PROT_EXEC | PROT_READ | PROT_BTI);
>
> while systemd's MDWX filter would reject the call if
>
> (new_flags & PROT_EXEC) &&
> (!(old_flags & PROT_EXEC) || (new_flags & PROT_WRITE)
>
>
>
> This won't magically fix current code, but something along these lines
> might be better going forward.
>
>
> Thoughts?
Looks good to me.
-Topi
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-26 16:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <8584c14f-5c28-9d70-c054-7c78127d84ea@arm.com>
2020-10-22 7:18 ` [systemd-devel] BTI interaction between seccomp filters in systemd and glibc mprotect calls, causing service failures Lennart Poettering
2020-10-22 7:54 ` Florian Weimer
2020-10-22 8:17 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-10-22 8:25 ` Florian Weimer
2020-10-22 8:29 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-10-22 8:38 ` Lennart Poettering
2020-10-22 9:31 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-22 10:12 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-10-22 10:27 ` Florian Weimer
2020-10-23 6:13 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-10-23 9:04 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-22 10:03 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-10-22 8:05 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-10-22 8:31 ` Lennart Poettering
[not found] ` <20201022075447.GO3819@arm.com>
2020-10-22 10:39 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-10-22 20:02 ` Kees Cook
2020-10-22 22:24 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-10-23 17:52 ` Salvatore Mesoraca
2020-10-24 11:34 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-10-24 14:12 ` Salvatore Mesoraca
2020-10-25 13:42 ` Jordan Glover
2020-10-23 9:02 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-24 11:01 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-10-26 14:52 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-26 15:56 ` Dave Martin
2020-10-26 16:51 ` Mark Brown
2020-10-26 16:31 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-10-26 16:24 ` Dave Martin
2020-10-26 16:39 ` Topi Miettinen [this message]
2020-10-26 16:45 ` Florian Weimer
2020-10-27 14:22 ` Dave Martin
2020-10-27 14:41 ` Florian Weimer
2020-10-26 16:57 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-10-26 17:52 ` Dave Martin
2020-10-26 22:39 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-10-27 14:15 ` Dave Martin
2020-10-29 11:02 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-04 12:18 ` Dave Martin
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=ed3407a9-8479-edf7-23eb-5354e77d2a58@gmail.com \
--to=toiwoton@gmail.com \
--cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).