Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Add pkru into seccomp_data

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 8:35 AM, Michael Sammler <msammler@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Add the current value of the PKRU register to data available for
> seccomp-bpf programs to work on. This allows filters based on the
> currently enabled protection keys.

As mentioned in the thread, this commit log needs to be expanded greatly. :)

>
> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Will Drewry <wad@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Michael Sammler <msammler@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/mips/kernel/ptrace.c                     | 2 ++
>  arch/x86/entry/common.c                       | 2 ++
>  include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h                  | 4 ++++
>  kernel/seccomp.c                              | 2 ++
>  tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 4 +++-
>  5 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/ptrace.c b/arch/mips/kernel/ptrace.c
> index e5ba56c0..07d55955 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/kernel/ptrace.c
> +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/ptrace.c
> @@ -1277,6 +1277,8 @@ asmlinkage long syscall_trace_enter(struct pt_regs *regs, long syscall)
>                 for (i = 0; i < 6; i++)
>                         sd.args[i] = args[i];
>                 sd.instruction_pointer = KSTK_EIP(current);
> +               sd.pkru = 0;
> +               sd.reserved = 0;
>
>                 ret = __secure_computing(&sd);
>                 if (ret == -1)
> diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/common.c b/arch/x86/entry/common.c
> index 3b2490b8..2afa85d7 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/entry/common.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/entry/common.c
> @@ -98,6 +98,8 @@ static long syscall_trace_enter(struct pt_regs *regs)
>                 sd.arch = arch;
>                 sd.nr = regs->orig_ax;
>                 sd.instruction_pointer = regs->ip;
> +               sd.pkru = read_pkru();
> +               sd.reserved = 0;
>  #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
>                 if (arch == AUDIT_ARCH_X86_64) {
>                         sd.args[0] = regs->di;
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h b/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> index 9efc0e73..e8b9ecfc 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/seccomp.h
> @@ -52,12 +52,16 @@
>   * @instruction_pointer: at the time of the system call.
>   * @args: up to 6 system call arguments always stored as 64-bit values
>   *        regardless of the architecture.
> + * @pkru: value of the pkru register
> + * @reserved: pad the structure to a multiple of eight bytes
>   */
>  struct seccomp_data {
>         int nr;
>         __u32 arch;
>         __u64 instruction_pointer;
>         __u64 args[6];
> +       __u32 pkru;
> +       __u32 reserved;
>  };

struct seccomp_data only needs to be 32-bit aligned. And since I think
old kernels will correctly reject filters that use the new, larger,
seccomp_data (via the sizeof() checks in seccomp_check_filter(), it
would be better to leave off the "reserved" field, since it has no
meaning right now, and it would be best to "version" the seccomp_data
entirely by size.

>
>  #endif /* _UAPI_LINUX_SECCOMP_H */
> diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c
> index fd023ac2..b193c26e 100644
> --- a/kernel/seccomp.c
> +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c
> @@ -91,6 +91,8 @@ static void populate_seccomp_data(struct seccomp_data *sd)
>         sd->args[4] = args[4];
>         sd->args[5] = args[5];
>         sd->instruction_pointer = KSTK_EIP(task);
> +       sd->pkru = read_pkru();

In some recent MPK usage[1] it sounded like the MPK instructions were
extremely expensive to run. I'm strongly against adding any global
performance regressions to seccomp, so if this field is slow to
populate, I think we'll need some kind of flag to have a filter opt in
to using it (and have it set to some impossible value otherwise).

[1] https://github.com/AndroidHardening/hardened_malloc/commit/e985afe0e16f4e1f0d178476342de10bce5d2c0c

> +       sd->reserved = 0;
>  }
>
>  /**
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> index e1473234..359249cd 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> @@ -732,7 +732,9 @@ TEST(KILL_process)
>  TEST(arg_out_of_range)
>  {
>         struct sock_filter filter[] = {
> -               BPF_STMT(BPF_LD|BPF_W|BPF_ABS, syscall_arg(6)),
> +               BPF_STMT(BPF_LD|BPF_W|BPF_ABS,
> +                       offsetof(struct seccomp_data, reserved)

This should probably just be sizeof(struct seccomp_data).

> +                               + sizeof(__u32)),
>                 BPF_STMT(BPF_RET|BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW),
>         };
>         struct sock_fprog prog = {
> --
> 2.11.0
>

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook



[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux