From: Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>
To: Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Feiner <pfeiner@google.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh.poyarekar@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-team@fb.com, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2] procfs: Always expose /proc/<pid>/map_files/ and make it readable
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 09:01:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54CF832A.7010707@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150131015842.GA431662@mail.thefacebook.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6117 bytes --]
On 2015-01-30 20:58, Calvin Owens wrote:
> On Thursday 01/29 at 17:30 -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 8:38 PM, Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday 01/26 at 15:43 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:54 +0300 Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 02:47:31PM +0200, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 07:15:44PM -0800, Calvin Owens wrote:
>>>>>>> Currently, /proc/<pid>/map_files/ is restricted to CAP_SYS_ADMIN, and
>>>>>>> is only exposed if CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE is set. This interface
>>>>>>> is very useful for enumerating the files mapped into a process when
>>>>>>> the more verbose information in /proc/<pid>/maps is not needed.
>>>>
>>>> This is the main (actually only) justification for the patch, and it it
>>>> far too thin. What does "not needed" mean. Why can't people just use
>>>> /proc/pid/maps?
>>>
>>> The biggest difference is that if you do something like this:
>>>
>>> fd = open("/stuff", O_BLAH);
>>> map = mmap(NULL, 4096, PROT_BLAH, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);
>>> close(fd);
>>> unlink("/stuff");
>>>
>>> ...then map_files/ gives you a way to get a file descriptor for
>>> "/stuff", which you couldn't do with /proc/pid/maps.
>>>
>>> It's also something of a win if you just want to see what is mapped at a
>>> specific address, since you can just readlink() the symlink for the
>>> address range you care about and it will go grab the appropriate VMA and
>>> give you the answer. /proc/pid/maps requires walking the VMA tree, which
>>> is quite expensive for processes with many thousands of threads, even
>>> without the O(N^2) issue.
>>>
>>> (You have to know what address range you want though, since readdir() on
>>> map_files/ obviously has to walk the VMA tree just like /proc/N/maps.)
>>>
>>>>>>> This patch moves the folder out from behind CHECKPOINT_RESTORE, and
>>>>>>> removes the CAP_SYS_ADMIN restrictions. Following the links requires
>>>>>>> the ability to ptrace the process in question, so this doesn't allow
>>>>>>> an attacker to do anything they couldn't already do before.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Calvin Owens <calvinowens@fb.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cc +linux-api@
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks good to me, thanks! Though I would really appreciate if someone
>>>>> from security camp take a look as well.
>>>>
>>>> hm, who's that. Kees comes to mind.
>>>>
>>>> And reviewers' task would be a heck of a lot easier if they knew what
>>>> /proc/pid/map_files actually does. This:
>>>>
>>>> akpm3:/usr/src/25> grep -r map_files Documentation
>>>> akpm3:/usr/src/25>
>>>>
>>>> does not help.
>>>>
>>>> The 640708a2cff7f81 changelog says:
>>>>
>>>> : This one behaves similarly to the /proc/<pid>/fd/ one - it contains
>>>> : symlinks one for each mapping with file, the name of a symlink is
>>>> : "vma->vm_start-vma->vm_end", the target is the file. Opening a symlink
>>>> : results in a file that point exactly to the same inode as them vma's one.
>>>> :
>>>> : For example the ls -l of some arbitrary /proc/<pid>/map_files/
>>>> :
>>>> : | lr-x------ 1 root root 64 Aug 26 06:40 7f8f80403000-7f8f80404000 -> /lib64/libc-2.5.so
>>>> : | lr-x------ 1 root root 64 Aug 26 06:40 7f8f8061e000-7f8f80620000 -> /lib64/libselinux.so.1
>>>> : | lr-x------ 1 root root 64 Aug 26 06:40 7f8f80826000-7f8f80827000 -> /lib64/libacl.so.1.1.0
>>>> : | lr-x------ 1 root root 64 Aug 26 06:40 7f8f80a2f000-7f8f80a30000 -> /lib64/librt-2.5.so
>>>> : | lr-x------ 1 root root 64 Aug 26 06:40 7f8f80a30000-7f8f80a4c000 -> /lib64/ld-2.5.so
>>>>
>>>> afacit this info is also available in /proc/pid/maps, so things
>>>> shouldn't get worse if the /proc/pid/map_files permissions are at least
>>>> as restrictive as the /proc/pid/maps permissions. Is that the case?
>>>> (Please add to changelog).
>>>
>>> Yes, the only difference is that you can follow the link as per above.
>>> I'll resend with a new message explaining that and the deletion thing.
>>>
>>>> There's one other problem here: we're assuming that the map_files
>>>> implementation doesn't have bugs. If it does have bugs then relaxing
>>>> permissions like this will create new vulnerabilities. And the
>>>> map_files implementation is surprisingly complex. Is it bug-free?
>>>
>>> While I was messing with it I used it a good bit and didn't see any
>>> issues, although I didn't actively try to fuzz it or anything. I'd be
>>> happy to write something to test hammering it in weird ways if you like.
>>> I'm also happy to write testcases for namespaces.
>>>
>>> So far as security issues, as others have pointed out you can't follow
>>> the links unless you can ptrace the process in question, which seems
>>> like a pretty solid guarantee. As Cyrill pointed out in the discussion
>>> about the documentation, that's the same protection as /proc/N/fd/*, and
>>> those links function in the same way.
>>
>> My concern here is that fd/* are connected as streams, and while that
>> has a certain level of badness as an external-to-the-process attacker,
>> PTRACE_MODE_READ is much weaker than PTRACE_MODE_ATTACH (which is
>> required for access to /proc/N/mem). Since these fds are the things
>> mapped into memory on a process, writing to them is a subset of access
>> to /proc/N/mem, and I don't feel that PTRACE_MODE_READ is sufficient.
>
> If you haven't done close() on a mmapped file, doesn't fd/* allow the
> same access to the corresponding regions of memory? Or am I missing
> something?
>
> But that said, I can't think of any reason making it MODE_ATTACH would
> be a problem. Would you rather that be enforced on follow_link() like
> the original patch did, or enforce it for the whole directory?
>
Whole directory would probably be better, as even just the mapped ranges
could be considered sensitive information. Ideally, the check should be
done on both follow_link(), and the directory itself.
[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 2455 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-02 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-14 0:20 [RFC][PATCH] procfs: Add /proc/<pid>/mapped_files Calvin Owens
2015-01-14 0:23 ` Calvin Owens
2015-01-14 14:13 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-01-14 14:37 ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2015-01-14 14:53 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-01-14 21:03 ` Calvin Owens
2015-01-14 22:45 ` Andrew Morton
2015-01-14 23:51 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-01-16 1:15 ` Andrew Morton
2015-01-16 11:00 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-01-14 15:25 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-01-14 15:33 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-01-14 20:46 ` Calvin Owens
2015-01-14 21:16 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-01-22 2:45 ` [RFC][PATCH] procfs: Always expose /proc/<pid>/map_files/ and make it readable Calvin Owens
2015-01-22 7:16 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-01-22 11:02 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-01-22 21:00 ` Calvin Owens
2015-01-22 21:27 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-01-23 5:52 ` Calvin Owens
2015-01-24 3:15 ` [RFC][PATCH v2] " Calvin Owens
2015-01-26 12:47 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-01-26 21:00 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-01-26 23:43 ` Andrew Morton
2015-01-27 0:15 ` Kees Cook
2015-01-27 7:37 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-01-27 19:53 ` Kees Cook
2015-01-27 21:35 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-01-27 21:46 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2015-01-27 0:19 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-01-27 6:46 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-01-27 6:50 ` Andrew Morton
2015-01-27 7:23 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-01-28 4:38 ` Calvin Owens
2015-01-30 1:30 ` Kees Cook
2015-01-31 1:58 ` Calvin Owens
2015-02-02 14:01 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn [this message]
2015-02-04 3:53 ` Calvin Owens
2015-02-02 20:16 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-02-04 3:28 ` Calvin Owens
2015-02-12 2:29 ` [RFC][PATCH v3] " Calvin Owens
2015-02-12 7:45 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-02-14 20:40 ` [RFC][PATCH v4] " Calvin Owens
2015-03-10 22:17 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-04-28 22:23 ` Calvin Owens
2015-04-29 7:32 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-05-19 3:10 ` [PATCH v5] " Calvin Owens
2015-05-19 3:29 ` Joe Perches
2015-05-19 18:04 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-05-21 1:52 ` Calvin Owens
2015-05-21 2:10 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-06-09 3:39 ` [PATCH v6] " Calvin Owens
2015-06-09 17:27 ` Kees Cook
2015-06-09 17:47 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-06-09 18:15 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2015-06-09 21:13 ` Andrew Morton
2015-06-10 1:39 ` Calvin Owens
2015-06-10 20:58 ` Andrew Morton
2015-06-11 11:10 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2015-06-11 18:49 ` Andrew Morton
2015-06-12 9:55 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2015-06-19 2:32 ` [PATCH v7] " Calvin Owens
2015-07-15 22:21 ` Andrew Morton
2015-07-15 23:39 ` Calvin Owens
2015-02-14 20:44 ` [PATCH] procfs: Return -ESRCH on /proc/N/fd/* when PID N doesn't exist Calvin Owens
2015-01-14 22:40 ` [RFC][PATCH] procfs: Add /proc/<pid>/mapped_files Kirill A. Shutemov
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=54CF832A.7010707@gmail.com \
--to=ahferroin7@gmail.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=calvinowens@fb.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=pfeiner@google.com \
--cc=siddhesh.poyarekar@gmail.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=xemul@openvz.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).