On Thu, Aug 8, 2024 at 11:48 AM Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2024 at 9:40 AM Stephen Smalley > <stephen.smalley.work@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2024 at 9:09 AM Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > This reverts commit 68df1baf158fddc07b6f0333e4c81fe1ccecd6ff. > > > > > > The selinux only want to check whether the VMA range is within the heap > > > range or not, but vma_is_initial_heap() helper will check the intersection > > > between the two ranges, which leads to some issue, let's turn back to the > > > original validation. > > > > > > Reported-by: Marc Reisner <reisner.marc@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZrPmoLKJEf1wiFmM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > Fixes: 68df1baf158f ("selinux: use vma_is_initial_stack() and vma_is_initial_heap()") > > > Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I was only going to recommend reverting the change to the heap check > > but in case Paul is fine with a straight revert, > > Acked-by: Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@xxxxxxxxx> > > I was hoping that the mm folks would put together a quick patch to fix > what looks like a problem with the helper, but I'm not sure when that > is going to happen and with other callers I don't want to change the > helper and break a different part of the kernel. Unfortunately that > leaves us with needing a revert, but like Stephen said, I think > reverting just the heap helper is the right thing to do right now; I > also want to put a comment in there for the next time someone tries to > re-add the vma_is_initial_heap(). Give me some time, I'll have a > patch out for this later today. FWIW, I tossed the reproducer code from Marc Reisner into a branch of the SELinux testsuite and wrapped it up with an added test to the mmap tests here: https://github.com/stephensmalley/selinux-testsuite/tree/execheapregression Passes with the revert, fails without. Would need to be modified to be portable to actually be suitable for inclusion though.
