+ execve-warn-if-process-starts-with-executable-stack.patch added to -mm tree

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

 



The patch titled
     Subject: execve: warn if process starts with executable stack
has been added to the -mm tree.  Its filename is
     execve-warn-if-process-starts-with-executable-stack.patch

This patch should soon appear at
    http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/execve-warn-if-process-starts-with-executable-stack.patch
and later at
    http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/execve-warn-if-process-starts-with-executable-stack.patch

Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
   a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
   b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
   c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
      reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's

*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***

The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated
there every 3-4 working days

------------------------------------------------------
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: execve: warn if process starts with executable stack

There were few episodes of silent downgrade to an executable stack over
years:

1) linking innocent looking assembly file will silently add executable
   stack if proper linker options is not given as well:

	$ cat f.S
	.intel_syntax noprefix
	.text
	.globl f
	f:
	        ret

	$ cat main.c
	void f(void);
	int main(void)
	{
	        f();
	        return 0;
	}

	$ gcc main.c f.S
	$ readelf -l ./a.out
	  GNU_STACK      0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000
                         0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000  RWE    0x10
			 					 ^^^

2) converting C99 nested function into a closure
https://nullprogram.com/blog/2019/11/15/

	void intsort2(int *base, size_t nmemb, _Bool invert)
	{
	    int cmp(const void *a, const void *b)
	    {
	        int r = *(int *)a - *(int *)b;
	        return invert ? -r : r;
	    }
	    qsort(base, nmemb, sizeof(*base), cmp);
	}

will silently require stack trampolines while non-closure version will not.

Without doubt this behaviour is documented somewhere, add a warning so
that developers and users can at least notice.  After so many years of
x86_64 having proper executable stack support it should not cause too many
problems.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191208171918.GC19716@avx2
Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---

 fs/exec.c |    5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

--- a/fs/exec.c~execve-warn-if-process-starts-with-executable-stack
+++ a/fs/exec.c
@@ -761,6 +761,11 @@ int setup_arg_pages(struct linux_binprm
 		goto out_unlock;
 	BUG_ON(prev != vma);
 
+	if (unlikely(vm_flags & VM_EXEC)) {
+		pr_warn_once("process '%pD4' started with executable stack\n",
+			     bprm->file);
+	}
+
 	/* Move stack pages down in memory. */
 	if (stack_shift) {
 		ret = shift_arg_pages(vma, stack_shift);
_

Patches currently in -mm which might be from adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx are

ramfs-support-o_tmpfile.patch
elf-smaller-code-generation-around-auxv-vector-fill.patch
execve-warn-if-process-starts-with-executable-stack.patch




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Archive]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux