Thread (31 messages) 31 messages, 4 authors, 2024-07-09

Re: [PATCH v13 5/5] bpf: Only enable BPF LSM hooks when an LSM program is attached

From: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>
Date: 2024-07-03 16:55:39
Also in: bpf

On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 2:07 AM Paul Moore [off-list ref] wrote:
On Jun 29, 2024 KP Singh [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
BPF LSM hooks have side-effects (even when a default value's returned)
as some hooks end up behaving differently due to the very presence of
the hook.

The static keys guarding the BPF LSM hooks are disabled by default and
enabled only when a BPF program is attached implementing the hook
logic. This avoids the issue of the side-effects and also the minor
overhead associated with the empty callback.

security_file_ioctl:
   0xff...0e30 <+0>:  endbr64
   0xff...0e34 <+4>:  nopl   0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
   0xff...0e39 <+9>:  push   %rbp
   0xff...0e3a <+10>: push   %r14
   0xff...0e3c <+12>: push   %rbx
   0xff...0e3d <+13>: mov    %rdx,%rbx
   0xff...0e40 <+16>: mov    %esi,%ebp
   0xff...0e42 <+18>: mov    %rdi,%r14
   0xff...0e45 <+21>: jmp    0xff...0e57 <security_file_ioctl+39>
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

   Static key enabled for SELinux

   0xff...0e47 <+23>: xchg   %ax,%ax
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

   Static key disabled for BPF. This gets patched when a BPF LSM
   program is attached

   0xff...0e49 <+25>: xor    %eax,%eax
   0xff...0e4b <+27>: xchg   %ax,%ax
   0xff...0e4d <+29>: pop    %rbx
   0xff...0e4e <+30>: pop    %r14
   0xff...0e50 <+32>: pop    %rbp
   0xff...0e51 <+33>: cs jmp 0xff...0000 <__x86_return_thunk>
   0xff...0e57 <+39>: endbr64
   0xff...0e5b <+43>: mov    %r14,%rdi
   0xff...0e5e <+46>: mov    %ebp,%esi
   0xff...0e60 <+48>: mov    %rbx,%rdx
   0xff...0e63 <+51>: call   0xff...33c0 <selinux_file_ioctl>
   0xff...0e68 <+56>: test   %eax,%eax
   0xff...0e6a <+58>: jne    0xff...0e4d <security_file_ioctl+29>
   0xff...0e6c <+60>: jmp    0xff...0e47 <security_file_ioctl+23>
   0xff...0e6e <+62>: endbr64
   0xff...0e72 <+66>: mov    %r14,%rdi
   0xff...0e75 <+69>: mov    %ebp,%esi
   0xff...0e77 <+71>: mov    %rbx,%rdx
   0xff...0e7a <+74>: call   0xff...e3b0 <bpf_lsm_file_ioctl>
   0xff...0e7f <+79>: test   %eax,%eax
   0xff...0e81 <+81>: jne    0xff...0e4d <security_file_ioctl+29>
   0xff...0e83 <+83>: jmp    0xff...0e49 <security_file_ioctl+25>
   0xff...0e85 <+85>: endbr64
   0xff...0e89 <+89>: mov    %r14,%rdi
   0xff...0e8c <+92>: mov    %ebp,%esi
   0xff...0e8e <+94>: mov    %rbx,%rdx
   0xff...0e91 <+97>: pop    %rbx
   0xff...0e92 <+98>: pop    %r14
   0xff...0e94 <+100>:        pop    %rbp
   0xff...0e95 <+101>:        ret

This patch enables this by providing a LSM_HOOK_INIT_RUNTIME variant
that allows the LSMs to opt-in to hooks which can be toggled at runtime
which with security_toogle_hook.

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <redacted>
Acked-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>
---
 include/linux/lsm_hooks.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 kernel/bpf/trampoline.c   | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 security/bpf/hooks.c      |  2 +-
 security/security.c       | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 4 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
I didn't look at this one too closely, see my previous comments in
patch 3/5, but I did catch one typo, see below ...
quoted
diff --git a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
index a66ca68485a2..dbe0f40f7f67 100644
--- a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
+++ b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h
@@ -110,11 +110,14 @@ struct lsm_id {
  * @scalls: The beginning of the array of static calls assigned to this hook.
  * @hook: The callback for the hook.
  * @lsm: The name of the lsm that owns this hook.
+ * @default_state: The state of the LSM hook when initialized. If set to false,
+ * the static key guarding the hook will be set to disabled.
  */
 struct security_hook_list {
      struct lsm_static_call  *scalls;
      union security_list_options     hook;
      const struct lsm_id             *lsmid;
+     bool                            runtime;
 } __randomize_layout;
The comment header doesn't match the struct fields, "default_state" vs
"runtime".
Good catch, apologies for the omission.
--
paul-moore.com
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help