Thread (15 messages) 15 messages, 7 authors, 2024-01-27

Re: Re: [PATCH] exec: Check __FMODE_EXEC instead of in_execve for LSMs

From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
Date: 2024-01-25 16:39:08
Also in: linux-fsdevel, linux-hardening, linux-mm, lkml

On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 01:32:02PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 12:47:34PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
quoted
On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 12:15, Kees Cook [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hmpf, and frustratingly Ubuntu (and Debian) still builds with
CONFIG_USELIB, even though it was reported[2] to them almost 4 years ago.
For completeness, Fedora hasn't had CONFIG_USELIB for a while now.
quoted
Well, we could just remove the __FMODE_EXEC from uselib.

It's kind of wrong anyway.
Yeah.
quoted
So I think just removing __FMODE_EXEC would just do the
RightThing(tm), and changes nothing for any sane situation.
Agreed about these:

- fs/fcntl.c is just doing a bitfield sanity check.

- nfs_open_permission_mask(), as you say, is only checking for
  unreadable case.

- fsnotify would also see uselib() as a read, but afaict,
  that's what it would see for an mmap(), so this should
  be functionally safe.

This one, though, I need some more time to examine:

- AppArmor, TOMOYO, and LandLock will see uselib() as an
  open-for-read, so that might still be a problem? As you
  say, it's more of a mmap() call, but that would mean
  adding something a call like security_mmap_file() into
  uselib()...
If user space can emulate uselib() without opening a file with
__FMODE_EXEC, then there is no security reason to keep __FMODE_EXEC for
uselib().

Removing __FMODE_EXEC from uselib() looks OK for Landlock.  We use
__FMODE_EXEC to infer if a file is being open for execution i.e., by
execve(2).

If __FMODE_EXEC is removed from uselib(), I think it should also be
backported to all stable kernels for consistency though.

quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
The issue isn't an insane "support uselib() under AppArmor" case, but
rather "Can uselib() be used to bypass exec/mmap checks?"

This totally untested patch might give appropriate coverage:
diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
index d179abb78a1c..0c9265312c8d 100644
--- a/fs/exec.c
+++ b/fs/exec.c
@@ -143,6 +143,10 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(uselib, const char __user *, library)
 	if (IS_ERR(file))
 		goto out;
 
+	error = security_mmap_file(file, PROT_READ | PROT_EXEC, MAP_FIXED | MAP_SHARED);
+	if (error)
+		goto exit;
+
 	/*
 	 * may_open() has already checked for this, so it should be
 	 * impossible to trip now. But we need to be extra cautious
quoted
Of course, as you say, not having CONFIG_USELIB enabled at all is the
_truly_ sane thing, but the only thing that used the FMODE_EXEC bit
were landlock and some special-case nfs stuff.
Do we want to attempt deprecation again? This was suggested last time:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200518130251.zih2s32q2rxhxg6f@wittgenstein/ (local)

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help