On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 04:30:44PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> cc: some libc folks
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 6:45 AM Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > POSIX specifies that the first field of the supplied msgp, namely mtype,
> > is a long, not a __kernel_long_t, and it's a user-defined struct due to
> > the variable-length mtext field so we can't even bend the spec and make
> > it a __kernel_long_t even if we wanted to. Thus we must use the compat
> > syscalls on x32 to avoid buffer overreads and overflows in msgsnd and
> > msgrcv respectively.
>
> This is a mess.
>
> include/uapi/linux/msg.h has:
>
> /* message buffer for msgsnd and msgrcv calls */
> struct msgbuf {
> __kernel_long_t mtype; /* type of message */
> char mtext[1]; /* message text */
> };
>
> Your test has:
>
> struct msg_long {
> long mtype;
> char mtext[8];
> };
>
> struct msg_long_ext {
> struct msg_long msg_long;
> char mext[4];
> };
>
> and I'm unclear as to exactly what you're trying to do there with the
> "mext" part.
>
> POSIX says:
>
> The application shall ensure that the argument msgp points to a user-
> defined buffer that contains first a field of type long specifying the
> type of the message, and then a data portion that holds the data bytes
> of the message. The structure below is an example of what this user-de‐
> fined buffer might look like:
>
> struct mymsg {
> long mtype; /* Message type. */
> char mtext[1]; /* Message text. */
> }
>
> NTP has this delightful piece of code:
>
> 44 typedef union {
> 45 struct msgbuf msgp;
> 46 struct {
> 47 long mtype;
> 48 int code;
> 49 struct timeval tv;
> 50 } msgb;
> 51 } MsgBuf;
>
> bluefish has:
>
> struct small_msgbuf {
> long mtype;
> char mtext[MSQ_QUEUE_SMALL_SIZE];
> } small_msgp;
>
>
> My laptop has nothing at all in /dev/mqueue.
>
> So I don't really know what the right thing to do is. Certainly if
> we're going to apply this patch, we should also fix the header. I
> almost think we should *delete* struct msgbuf from the headers, since
> it's all kinds of busted, but that will break the NTP build. Ideally
> we would go back in time and remove it from the headers.
>
> Libc people, any insight? We can probably fix the bug without
> annoying anyone given how lightly x32 is used and how lightly POSIX
> message queues are used.
If it's that outright wrong and always has been, I feel like the old
syscall numbers should just be deprecated and new ones assigned.
Otherwise, there's no way for userspace to be safe against data
corruption when run on older kernels. If there's a new syscall number,
libc can just use the new one unconditionally (giving ENOSYS on
kernels where it would be broken) or have a x32-specific
implementation that makes the old syscall and performs translation if
the new one fails with ENOSYS.
Rich
