summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2019-04-29 13:24:34 -0700
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2019-04-29 13:24:34 -0700
commit83a50840e72a5a964b4704fcdc2fbb2d771015ab (patch)
tree9cbd662133d250f7e199a4e7a38a66dc67a7c935
parent80871482fd5cb1cb396ea232237a7d9c540854f9 (diff)
parent7a0df7fbc14505e2e2be19ed08654a09e1ed5bf6 (diff)
downloadlinux-83a50840e72a5a964b4704fcdc2fbb2d771015ab.tar.bz2
Merge tag 'seccomp-v5.1-rc8' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kees/linux
Pull seccomp fixes from Kees Cook: "Syzbot found a use-after-free bug in seccomp due to flags that should not be allowed to be used together. Tycho fixed this, I updated the self-tests, and the syzkaller PoC has been running for several days without triggering KASan (before this fix, it would reproduce). These patches have also been in -next for almost a week, just to be sure. - Add logic for making some seccomp flags exclusive (Tycho) - Update selftests for exclusivity testing (Kees)" * tag 'seccomp-v5.1-rc8' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kees/linux: seccomp: Make NEW_LISTENER and TSYNC flags exclusive selftests/seccomp: Prepare for exclusive seccomp flags
-rw-r--r--kernel/seccomp.c17
-rw-r--r--tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c34
2 files changed, 40 insertions, 11 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c
index df27e499956a..3582eeb59893 100644
--- a/kernel/seccomp.c
+++ b/kernel/seccomp.c
@@ -502,7 +502,10 @@ out:
*
* Caller must be holding current->sighand->siglock lock.
*
- * Returns 0 on success, -ve on error.
+ * Returns 0 on success, -ve on error, or
+ * - in TSYNC mode: the pid of a thread which was either not in the correct
+ * seccomp mode or did not have an ancestral seccomp filter
+ * - in NEW_LISTENER mode: the fd of the new listener
*/
static long seccomp_attach_filter(unsigned int flags,
struct seccomp_filter *filter)
@@ -1258,6 +1261,16 @@ static long seccomp_set_mode_filter(unsigned int flags,
if (flags & ~SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_MASK)
return -EINVAL;
+ /*
+ * In the successful case, NEW_LISTENER returns the new listener fd.
+ * But in the failure case, TSYNC returns the thread that died. If you
+ * combine these two flags, there's no way to tell whether something
+ * succeeded or failed. So, let's disallow this combination.
+ */
+ if ((flags & SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC) &&
+ (flags & SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
/* Prepare the new filter before holding any locks. */
prepared = seccomp_prepare_user_filter(filter);
if (IS_ERR(prepared))
@@ -1304,7 +1317,7 @@ out:
mutex_unlock(&current->signal->cred_guard_mutex);
out_put_fd:
if (flags & SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER) {
- if (ret < 0) {
+ if (ret) {
listener_f->private_data = NULL;
fput(listener_f);
put_unused_fd(listener);
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
index f69d2ee29742..5019cdae5d0b 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
@@ -2166,11 +2166,14 @@ TEST(detect_seccomp_filter_flags)
SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_LOG,
SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_SPEC_ALLOW,
SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER };
- unsigned int flag, all_flags;
+ unsigned int exclusive[] = {
+ SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC,
+ SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER };
+ unsigned int flag, all_flags, exclusive_mask;
int i;
long ret;
- /* Test detection of known-good filter flags */
+ /* Test detection of individual known-good filter flags */
for (i = 0, all_flags = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(flags); i++) {
int bits = 0;
@@ -2197,16 +2200,29 @@ TEST(detect_seccomp_filter_flags)
all_flags |= flag;
}
- /* Test detection of all known-good filter flags */
- ret = seccomp(SECCOMP_SET_MODE_FILTER, all_flags, NULL);
- EXPECT_EQ(-1, ret);
- EXPECT_EQ(EFAULT, errno) {
- TH_LOG("Failed to detect that all known-good filter flags (0x%X) are supported!",
- all_flags);
+ /*
+ * Test detection of all known-good filter flags combined. But
+ * for the exclusive flags we need to mask them out and try them
+ * individually for the "all flags" testing.
+ */
+ exclusive_mask = 0;
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(exclusive); i++)
+ exclusive_mask |= exclusive[i];
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(exclusive); i++) {
+ flag = all_flags & ~exclusive_mask;
+ flag |= exclusive[i];
+
+ ret = seccomp(SECCOMP_SET_MODE_FILTER, flag, NULL);
+ EXPECT_EQ(-1, ret);
+ EXPECT_EQ(EFAULT, errno) {
+ TH_LOG("Failed to detect that all known-good filter flags (0x%X) are supported!",
+ flag);
+ }
}
- /* Test detection of an unknown filter flag */
+ /* Test detection of an unknown filter flags, without exclusives. */
flag = -1;
+ flag &= ~exclusive_mask;
ret = seccomp(SECCOMP_SET_MODE_FILTER, flag, NULL);
EXPECT_EQ(-1, ret);
EXPECT_EQ(EINVAL, errno) {