lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/4] seccomp: Add SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS
From
Date
On 08/07/2017 08:59 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> Right now, SECCOMP_RET_KILL kills the current thread. There have been
> a few requests for RET_KILL to kill the entire process (the thread
> group), but since seccomp's u32 return values are ABI, and ordered by
> lowest value, with RET_KILL as 0, there isn't a trivial way to provide
> an even smaller value that would mean the more restrictive action of
> killing the thread group.
>
> Instead, create a filter flag that indicates that a RET_KILL from this
> filter must kill the process rather than the thread. This can be set
> (and not cleared) via the new SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS flag.
>
> Pros:
> - the logic for the filter action is contained in the filter.
> - userspace can detect support for the feature since earlier kernels
> will reject the new flag.
> Cons:
> - depends on adding an assignment to the seccomp_run_filters() loop
> (previous patch).
>
> Alternatives to this approach with pros/cons:
>
> - Use a new test during seccomp_run_filters() that treats the RET_DATA
> mask of a RET_KILL action as special. If a new bit is set in the data,
> then treat the return value as -1 (lower than 0).
> Pros:
> - the logic for the filter action is contained in the filter.
> Cons:
> - added complexity to time-sensitive seccomp_run_filters() loop.
> - there isn't a trivial way for userspace to detect if the kernel
> supports the feature (earlier kernels will silently ignore the
> RET_DATA and only kill the thread).
>
> - Have SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS attach to the seccomp struct
> rather than the filter.
> Pros:
> - no change needed to seccomp_run_filters() loop.
> Cons:
> - the change in behavior technically originates external to the
> filter, which allows for later filters to "enhance" a previously
> applied filter's RET_KILL to kill the entire process, which may
> be unexpected.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>

v2 of these patches all look good to me.

Reviewed-by: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@canonical.com>

Thanks!

Tyler

> ---
> include/linux/seccomp.h | 3 ++-
> include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h | 3 ++-
> kernel/seccomp.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++-
> 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/seccomp.h b/include/linux/seccomp.h
> index ecc296c137cd..59d001ba655c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/seccomp.h
> +++ b/include/linux/seccomp.h
> @@ -3,7 +3,8 @@
>
> #include <uapi/linux/seccomp.h>
>
> -#define SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_MASK (SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC)
> +#define SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_MASK (SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC | \
> + SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS)
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_SECCOMP
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h b/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> index 0f238a43ff1e..4b75d8c297b6 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> @@ -15,7 +15,8 @@
> #define SECCOMP_SET_MODE_FILTER 1
>
> /* Valid flags for SECCOMP_SET_MODE_FILTER */
> -#define SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC 1
> +#define SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC 1
> +#define SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS 2
>
> /*
> * All BPF programs must return a 32-bit value.
> diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c
> index 1f3347fc2605..297f8bfc3b72 100644
> --- a/kernel/seccomp.c
> +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c
> @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@
> * is only needed for handling filters shared across tasks.
> * @prev: points to a previously installed, or inherited, filter
> * @prog: the BPF program to evaluate
> + * @kill_process: if true, RET_KILL will kill process rather than thread.
> *
> * seccomp_filter objects are organized in a tree linked via the @prev
> * pointer. For any task, it appears to be a singly-linked list starting
> @@ -57,6 +58,7 @@
> */
> struct seccomp_filter {
> refcount_t usage;
> + bool kill_process;
> struct seccomp_filter *prev;
> struct bpf_prog *prog;
> };
> @@ -450,6 +452,10 @@ static long seccomp_attach_filter(unsigned int flags,
> return ret;
> }
>
> + /* Set process-killing flag, if present. */
> + if (flags & SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_KILL_PROCESS)
> + filter->kill_process = true;
> +
> /*
> * If there is an existing filter, make it the prev and don't drop its
> * task reference.
> @@ -665,7 +671,21 @@ static int __seccomp_filter(int this_syscall, const struct seccomp_data *sd,
> seccomp_init_siginfo(&info, this_syscall, data);
> do_coredump(&info);
> }
> - do_exit(SIGSYS);
> + /*
> + * The only way match can be NULL here is if something
> + * went very wrong in seccomp_run_filters() (e.g. a NULL
> + * filter list in struct seccomp) and the return action
> + * falls back to failing closed. In this case, take the
> + * strongest possible action.
> + *
> + * If we get here with match->kill_process set, we need
> + * to kill the entire thread group. Otherwise, kill only
> + * the offending thread.
> + */
> + if (!match || match->kill_process)
> + do_group_exit(SIGSYS);
> + else
> + do_exit(SIGSYS);
> }
>
> unreachable();
>


[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-08 04:05    [W:0.051 / U:1.640 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site