[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170119120321.GA3396@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:03:21 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Thomas Sailer <t.sailer@...mni.ethz.ch>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, Alex Elder <elder@...nel.org>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Make static usermode helper
binaries constant
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 04:29:19PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:19:11AM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 08:13:47AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:25:55PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 05:50:31PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > There are a number of usermode helper binaries that are "hard coded" in
> > > > > the kernel today, so mark them as "const" to make it harder for someone
> > > > > to change where the variables point to.
> > > > >
> > > > ...
> > > > > --- a/drivers/pnp/pnpbios/core.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/pnp/pnpbios/core.c
> > > > > @@ -98,6 +98,7 @@ static struct completion unload_sem;
> > > > > */
> > > > > static int pnp_dock_event(int dock, struct pnp_docking_station_info *info)
> > > > > {
> > > > > + static char const sbin_pnpbios[] = "/sbin/pnpbios";
> > > > > char *argv[3], **envp, *buf, *scratch;
> > > > > int i = 0, value;
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -112,7 +113,7 @@ static int pnp_dock_event(int dock, struct pnp_docking_station_info *info)
> > > > > * integrated into the driver core and use the usual infrastructure
> > > > > * like sysfs and uevents
> > > > > */
> > > > > - argv[0] = "/sbin/pnpbios";
> > > > > + argv[0] = (char *)sbin_pnpbios;
> > > >
> > > > So here and elsewhere, can attackers write to argv[0] instead of to the
> > > > memory where the string lives?
> > >
> > > Yes, they could, it would be a very "tight" race to do that (have to
> > > write after the assignment and before the call_usermodehelper_exec()
> > > runs). However, the kernel does not run argv[0], it just passes it to
> > > the binary you specify in path, so for this example, the correct program
> > > would still be run by the kernel.
> >
> > In this case it's argv[0] that will be passed to call_usermodehelper as
> > path, but.... OK, this argv array and the various function call
> > arguments are all just data on the stack, so I guess it's all about
> > equivalent.
>
> Kind of, nice catch, I'll change the call to usermodehelper to use
> sbin_pnpbios here, as that's the right thing to do.
Oops, no, the patch was doing the right thing here, you missed the next
chunk of the patch:
@@ -139,7 +140,7 @@ static int pnp_dock_event(int dock, struct pnp_docking_station_info *info)
info->location_id, info->serial, info->capabilities);
envp[i] = NULL;
- value = call_usermodehelper(argv [0], argv, envp, UMH_WAIT_EXEC);
+ value = call_usermodehelper(sbin_pnpbios, argv, envp, UMH_WAIT_EXEC);
kfree(buf);
kfree(envp);
return 0;
So it's ok.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
