Thread (18 messages) 18 messages, 5 authors, 2021-02-08

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] x86/signal: Prevent an alternate stack overflow before a signal delivery

From: Bae, Chang Seok <hidden>
Date: 2020-11-24 20:43:51
Also in: linux-arch, lkml

quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
On Nov 24, 2020, at 10:41, Jann Horn [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 7:22 PM Bae, Chang Seok
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
On Nov 20, 2020, at 15:04, Jann Horn [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 8:40 PM Chang S. Bae [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
index ee6f1ceaa7a2..cee41d684dc2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
@@ -251,8 +251,13 @@ get_sigframe(struct k_sigaction *ka, struct pt_regs *regs, size_t frame_size,

      /* This is the X/Open sanctioned signal stack switching.  */
      if (ka->sa.sa_flags & SA_ONSTACK) {
-               if (sas_ss_flags(sp) == 0)
+               if (sas_ss_flags(sp) == 0) {
+                       /* If the altstack might overflow, die with SIGSEGV: */
+                       if (!altstack_size_ok(current))
+                               return (void __user *)-1L;
+
                      sp = current->sas_ss_sp + current->sas_ss_size;
+               }
A couple lines further down, we have this (since commit 14fc9fbc700d):

      /*
       * If we are on the alternate signal stack and would overflow it, don't.
       * Return an always-bogus address instead so we will die with SIGSEGV.
       */
      if (onsigstack && !likely(on_sig_stack(sp)))
              return (void __user *)-1L;

Is that not working?
onsigstack is set at the beginning here. If a signal hits under normal stack,
this flag is not set. Then it will miss the overflow.

The added check allows to detect the sigaltstack overflow (always).
Ah, I think I understand what you're trying to do. But wouldn't the
better approach be to ensure that the existing on_sig_stack() check is
also used if we just switched to the signal stack? Something like:
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
index be0d7d4152ec..2f57842fb4d6 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
@@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ get_sigframe(struct k_sigaction *ka, struct
pt_regs *regs, size_t frame_size,
       unsigned long math_size = 0;
       unsigned long sp = regs->sp;
       unsigned long buf_fx = 0;
-       int onsigstack = on_sig_stack(sp);
+       bool onsigstack = on_sig_stack(sp);
       int ret;

       /* redzone */
@@ -246,8 +246,10 @@ get_sigframe(struct k_sigaction *ka, struct
pt_regs *regs, size_t frame_size,

       /* This is the X/Open sanctioned signal stack switching.  */
       if (ka->sa.sa_flags & SA_ONSTACK) {
-               if (sas_ss_flags(sp) == 0)
+               if (sas_ss_flags(sp) == 0) {
                       sp = current->sas_ss_sp + current->sas_ss_size;
+                       onsigstack = true;
+               }
       } else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32) &&
                  !onsigstack &&
                  regs->ss != __USER_DS &&
Yeah, but wouldn't it better to avoid overwriting user data if we can? The old
check raises segfault *after* overwritten.

The old check is still helpful to detect an overflow from the nested signal(s)
under sigaltstack.

Thanks,
Chang
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help