lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] seccomp: Check flags on seccomp_notif is unset
On 2019-12-26, Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 25, 2019 at 09:45:33PM +0000, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> > This patch is a small change in enforcement of the uapi for
> > SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_RECV ioctl. Specificaly, the datastructure which is
> > passed (seccomp_notif), has a flags member. Previously that could be
> > set to a nonsense value, and we would ignore it. This ensures that
> > no flags are set.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sargun Dhillon <sargun@sargun.me>
> > Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>
> I'm fine with this since we soon want to make use of the flag argument
> when we add a flag to get a pidfd from the seccomp notifier on receive.
> The major users I could identify already pass in seccomp_notif with all
> fields set to 0. If we really break users we can always revert; this
> seems very unlikely to me though.
>
> One more question below, otherwise:
>
> Reviewed-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
>
> > ---
> > kernel/seccomp.c | 7 +++++++
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c
> > index 12d2227e5786..455925557490 100644
> > --- a/kernel/seccomp.c
> > +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c
> > @@ -1026,6 +1026,13 @@ static long seccomp_notify_recv(struct seccomp_filter *filter,
> > struct seccomp_notif unotif;
> > ssize_t ret;
> >
> > + if (copy_from_user(&unotif, buf, sizeof(unotif)))
> > + return -EFAULT;
> > +
> > + /* flags is reserved right now, make sure it's unset */
> > + if (unotif.flags)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
>
> Might it make sense to use
>
> err = copy_struct_from_user(&unotif, sizeof(unotif), buf, sizeof(unotif));
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> This way we check that the whole struct is 0 and report an error as soon
> as one of the members is non-zero. That's more drastic but it'd ensure
> that other fields can be used in the future for whatever purposes.
> It would also let us get rid of the memset() below.

Given that this isn't an extensible struct, it would be simpler to just do
check_zeroed_user() -- copy_struct_from_user() is overkill. That would
also remove the need for any copy_from_user()s and the memset can be
dropped by just doing

struct seccomp_notif unotif = {};

> > memset(&unotif, 0, sizeof(unotif));
> >
> > ret = down_interruptible(&filter->notif->request);
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >


--
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-26 15:32    [W:0.059 / U:9.564 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site