From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>,
Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>, Julien Tinnes <jln@chromium.org>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@google.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-mips@linux-mips.org,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 9/9] seccomp: implement SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 10:57:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jKkLS3++_dtWHnjWudVvaSR9DRwjNG3q00SmSy6XoCMaw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140625172410.GA17133@redhat.com>
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 06/25, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Yes, at least this should close the race with suid-exec. And there are no
>> > other users. Except apparmor, and I hope you will check it because I simply
>> > do not know what it does ;)
>> >
>> >> I wonder if changes to nnp need to "flushed" during syscall entry
>> >> instead of getting updated externally/asynchronously? That way it
>> >> won't be out of sync with the seccomp mode/filters.
>> >>
>> >> Perhaps secure computing needs to check some (maybe seccomp-only)
>> >> atomic flags and flip on the "real" nnp if found?
>> >
>> > Not sure I understand you, could you clarify?
>>
>> Instead of having TSYNC change the nnp bit, it can set a new flag, say:
>>
>> task->seccomp.flags |= SECCOMP_NEEDS_NNP;
>>
>> This would be set along with seccomp.mode, seccomp.filter, and
>> TIF_SECCOMP. Then, during the next secure_computing() call that thread
>> makes, it would check the flag:
>>
>> if (task->seccomp.flags & SECCOMP_NEEDS_NNP)
>> task->nnp = 1;
>>
>> This means that nnp couldn't change in the middle of a running syscall.
>
> Aha, so you were worried about the same thing. Not sure we need this,
> but at least I understand you and...
>
>> Hmmm. Perhaps this doesn't solve anything, though? Perhaps my proposal
>> above would actually make things worse, since now we'd have a thread
>> with seccomp set up, and no nnp. If it was in the middle of exec,
>> we're still causing a problem.
>
> Yes ;)
>
>> I think we'd also need a way to either delay the seccomp changes, or
>> to notice this condition during exec. Bleh.
>
> Hmm. confused again,
I mean to suggest that the tsync changes would be stored in each
thread, but somewhere other than the true seccomp struct, but with
TIF_SECCOMP set. When entering secure_computing(), current would check
for the "changes to sync", and apply them, then start the syscall. In
this way, we can never race a syscall (like exec).
>> What actually happens with a multi-threaded process calls exec? I
>> assume all the other threads are destroyed?
>
> Yes. But this is the point-of-no-return, de_thread() is called after the execing
> thared has already passed (say) check_unsafe_exec().
>
> However, do_execve() takes cred_guard_mutex at the start in prepare_bprm_creds()
> and drops it in install_exec_creds(), so it should solve the problem?
I can't tell yet. I'm still trying to understand the order of
operations here. It looks like de_thread() takes the sighand lock.
do_execve_common does:
prepare_bprm_creds (takes cred_guard_mutex)
check_unsafe_exec (checks nnp to set LSM_UNSAFE_NO_NEW_PRIVS)
prepare_binprm (handles suid escalation, checks nnp separately)
security_bprm_set_creds (checks LSM_UNSAFE_NO_NEW_PRIVS)
exec_binprm
load_elf_binary
flush_old_exec
de_thread (takes and releases sighand->lock)
install_exec_creds (releases cred_guard_mutex)
I don't see a way to use cred_guard_mutex during tsync (which holds
sighand->lock) without dead-locking. What were you considering here?
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-25 17:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-24 20:48 [PATCH v8 0/9] seccomp: add thread sync ability Kees Cook
2014-06-24 20:48 ` [PATCH v8 1/9] seccomp: create internal mode-setting function Kees Cook
2014-06-24 20:48 ` [PATCH v8 2/9] seccomp: split filter prep from check and apply Kees Cook
2014-06-24 20:48 ` [PATCH v8 3/9] seccomp: introduce writer locking Kees Cook
2014-06-25 14:03 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-25 18:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-25 18:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-27 17:27 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-24 20:48 ` [PATCH v8 4/9] sched: move no_new_privs into new atomic flags Kees Cook
2014-06-25 13:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-25 14:44 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-24 20:48 ` [PATCH v8 5/9] seccomp: split mode set routines Kees Cook
2014-06-25 13:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-25 14:51 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-25 16:10 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-25 16:54 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-25 17:03 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-25 17:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-25 17:38 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-25 17:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-25 18:00 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-25 18:07 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-27 18:33 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-27 18:39 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-27 18:52 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-27 18:56 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-27 19:04 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-27 19:11 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-27 19:27 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-27 19:31 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-27 19:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-27 20:08 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-27 20:56 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-25 17:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-24 20:48 ` [PATCH v8 6/9] seccomp: add "seccomp" syscall Kees Cook
2014-06-24 20:48 ` [PATCH v8 7/9] ARM: add seccomp syscall Kees Cook
2014-06-24 20:48 ` [PATCH v8 8/9] MIPS: " Kees Cook
2014-06-24 20:48 ` [PATCH v8 9/9] seccomp: implement SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC Kees Cook
2014-06-25 14:21 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-25 15:08 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-25 16:52 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-25 17:09 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-25 17:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-25 17:40 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-25 17:57 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2014-06-25 18:09 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-06-25 18:25 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-25 18:20 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-06-25 18:31 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-24 20:56 ` [PATCH v8 1/1] man-pages: seccomp.2: document syscall Kees Cook
2014-06-25 13:04 ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-06-25 15:10 ` Kees Cook
2014-06-25 17:54 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
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=CAGXu5jKkLS3++_dtWHnjWudVvaSR9DRwjNG3q00SmSy6XoCMaw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ast@plumgrid.com \
--cc=dborkman@redhat.com \
--cc=drysdale@google.com \
--cc=jln@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=wad@chromium.org \
--cc=x86@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).