On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 10:50 AM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 02:59:20PM +0000, Allen Pais wrote:
> > Introduce the capability to dynamically configure the maximum file
> > note size for ELF core dumps via sysctl. This enhancement removes
> > the previous static limit of 4MB, allowing system administrators to
> > adjust the size based on system-specific requirements or constraints.
> >
> > - Remove hardcoded `MAX_FILE_NOTE_SIZE` from `fs/binfmt_elf.c`.
> > - Define `max_file_note_size` in `fs/coredump.c` with an initial value
> > set to 4MB.
> > - Declare `max_file_note_size` as an external variable in
> > `include/linux/coredump.h`.
> > - Add a new sysctl entry in `kernel/sysctl.c` to manage this setting
> > at runtime.
> >
> > $ sysctl -a | grep max_file_note_size
> > kernel.max_file_note_size = 4194304
> >
> > $ sysctl -n kernel.max_file_note_size
> > 4194304
> >
> > $echo 519304 > /proc/sys/kernel/max_file_note_size
> >
> > $sysctl -n kernel.max_file_note_size
> > 519304
>
> The names and paths in the commit log need a refresh here, since they've
> changed.
Will fix it in v3.
>
> >
> > Why is this being done?
> > We have observed that during a crash when there are more than 65k mmaps
> > in memory, the existing fixed limit on the size of the ELF notes section
> > becomes a bottleneck. The notes section quickly reaches its capacity,
> > leading to incomplete memory segment information in the resulting coredump.
> > This truncation compromises the utility of the coredumps, as crucial
> > information about the memory state at the time of the crash might be
> > omitted.
>
> Thanks for adding this!
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vijay Nag <nagvijay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Allen Pais <apais@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Move new sysctl to fs/coredump.c [Luis & Kees]
> > - rename max_file_note_size to core_file_note_size_max [kees]
> > - Capture "why this is being done?" int he commit message [Luis & Kees]
> > ---
> > fs/binfmt_elf.c | 3 +--
> > fs/coredump.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > include/linux/coredump.h | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/binfmt_elf.c b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> > index 5397b552fbeb..6aebd062b92b 100644
> > --- a/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> > +++ b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> > @@ -1564,7 +1564,6 @@ static void fill_siginfo_note(struct memelfnote *note, user_siginfo_t *csigdata,
> > fill_note(note, "CORE", NT_SIGINFO, sizeof(*csigdata), csigdata);
> > }
> >
> > -#define MAX_FILE_NOTE_SIZE (4*1024*1024)
> > /*
> > * Format of NT_FILE note:
> > *
> > @@ -1592,7 +1591,7 @@ static int fill_files_note(struct memelfnote *note, struct coredump_params *cprm
> >
> > names_ofs = (2 + 3 * count) * sizeof(data[0]);
> > alloc:
> > - if (size >= MAX_FILE_NOTE_SIZE) /* paranoia check */
> > + if (size >= core_file_note_size_max) /* paranoia check */
> > return -EINVAL;
>
> I wonder, given the purpose of this sysctl, if it would be a
> discoverability improvement to include a pr_warn_once() before the
> EINVAL? Like:
>
> /* paranoia check */
> if (size >= core_file_note_size_max) {
> pr_warn_once("coredump Note size too large: %zu (does kernel.core_file_note_size_max sysctl need adjustment?\n", size);
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> What do folks think? (I can't imagine tracking down this problem
> originally was much fun, for example.)
I think this would really be helpful. I will go ahead and add this if
there's no objection from anyone.
Also, I haven't received a reply from Luis, do you think we need to
add a ceiling?
+#define MAX_FILE_NOTE_SIZE (4*1024*1024)
+#define MAX_ALLOWED_NOTE_SIZE (16*1024*1024) // Define a reasonable max cap
.....
+ {
+ .procname = "core_file_note_size_max",
+ .data = &core_file_note_size_max,
+ .maxlen = sizeof(unsigned int),
+ .mode = 0644,
+ .proc_handler = proc_core_file_note_size_max,
+ },
};
+int proc_core_file_note_size_max(struct ctl_table *table, int write,
void __user *buffer, size_t *lenp, loff_t *ppos) {
+ int error = proc_douintvec(table, write, buffer, lenp, ppos);
+ if (write && (core_file_note_size_max < MAX_FILE_NOTE_SIZE ||
core_file_note_size_max > MAX_ALLOWED_NOTE_SIZE))
+ core_file_note_size_max = MAX_FILE_NOTE_SIZE; // Revert to
default if out of bounds
+ return error;
+}
Or, should we go ahead with the current patch(with the warning added)?
Thanks,
Allen
>
> > size = round_up(size, PAGE_SIZE);
> > /*
> > diff --git a/fs/coredump.c b/fs/coredump.c
> > index be6403b4b14b..a312be48030f 100644
> > --- a/fs/coredump.c
> > +++ b/fs/coredump.c
> > @@ -56,10 +56,13 @@
> > static bool dump_vma_snapshot(struct coredump_params *cprm);
> > static void free_vma_snapshot(struct coredump_params *cprm);
> >
> > +#define MAX_FILE_NOTE_SIZE (4*1024*1024)
> > +
> > static int core_uses_pid;
> > static unsigned int core_pipe_limit;
> > static char core_pattern[CORENAME_MAX_SIZE] = "core";
> > static int core_name_size = CORENAME_MAX_SIZE;
> > +unsigned int core_file_note_size_max = MAX_FILE_NOTE_SIZE;
> >
> > struct core_name {
> > char *corename;
> > @@ -1020,6 +1023,13 @@ static struct ctl_table coredump_sysctls[] = {
> > .mode = 0644,
> > .proc_handler = proc_dointvec,
> > },
> > + {
> > + .procname = "core_file_note_size_max",
> > + .data = &core_file_note_size_max,
> > + .maxlen = sizeof(unsigned int),
> > + .mode = 0644,
> > + .proc_handler = proc_douintvec,
> > + },
> > };
> >
> > static int __init init_fs_coredump_sysctls(void)
> > diff --git a/include/linux/coredump.h b/include/linux/coredump.h
> > index d3eba4360150..14c057643e7f 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/coredump.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/coredump.h
> > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static inline void do_coredump(const kernel_siginfo_t *siginfo) {}
> > #endif
> >
> > #if defined(CONFIG_COREDUMP) && defined(CONFIG_SYSCTL)
> > +extern unsigned int core_file_note_size_max;
> > extern void validate_coredump_safety(void);
> > #else
> > static inline void validate_coredump_safety(void) {}
> > --
> > 2.17.1
>
> Otherwise, yes, this looks good to me.
>
> --
> Kees Cook
--
- Allen
