|
Message-ID: <eafae3a5-346b-5361-4551-7dc5a146e1da@interlog.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 18:53:12 +0200 From: Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@...erlog.com> To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, security@...nel.org, Benjamin Block <bblock@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sg: mitigate read/write abuse On 2018-06-21 05:18 PM, Jann Horn wrote: > As Al Viro noted in commit 128394eff343 ("sg_write()/bsg_write() is not fit > to be called under KERNEL_DS"), sg improperly accesses userspace memory > outside the provided buffer, permitting kernel memory corruption via > splice(). > But it doesn't just do it on ->write(), also on ->read(). > > As a band-aid, make sure that the ->read() and ->write() handlers can not > be called in weird contexts (kernel context or credentials different from > file opener), like for ib_safe_file_access(). > > If someone needs to use these interfaces from different security contexts, > a new interface should be written that goes through the ->ioctl() handler. > > I've mostly copypasted ib_safe_file_access() over as sg_safe_file_access() > because I couldn't find a good common header - please tell me if you know a > better way. > The duplicate pr_err_once() calls are so that each of them fires once; > otherwise, this would probably have to be a macro. > > changed in v2: > - remove the bsg parts per Christoph Hellwig's request > > Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> > Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> > --- > drivers/scsi/sg.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sg.c b/drivers/scsi/sg.c > index 53ae52dbff84..51b685192646 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/sg.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/sg.c > @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ static int sg_version_num = 30536; /* 2 digits for each component */ > #include <linux/atomic.h> > #include <linux/ratelimit.h> > #include <linux/uio.h> > +#include <linux/cred.h> /* for sg_safe_file_access() */ > > #include "scsi.h" > #include <scsi/scsi_dbg.h> > @@ -209,6 +210,23 @@ static void sg_device_destroy(struct kref *kref); > sdev_prefix_printk(prefix, (sdp)->device, \ > (sdp)->disk->disk_name, fmt, ##a) > > +/* > + * The SCSI interfaces that use read() and write() as an asynchronous variant of > + * ioctl(..., SG_IO, ...) are fundamentally unsafe, since there are lots of ways > + * to trigger read() and write() calls from various contexts with elevated > + * privileges. This can lead to kernel memory corruption (e.g. if these > + * interfaces are called through splice()) and privilege escalation inside > + * userspace (e.g. if a process with access to such a device passes a file > + * descriptor to a SUID binary as stdin/stdout/stderr). > + * > + * This function provides protection for the legacy API by restricting the > + * calling context. > + */ > +static inline bool sg_safe_file_access(struct file *filp) > +{ > + return filp->f_cred == current_cred() && !uaccess_kernel(); > +} > + > static int sg_allow_access(struct file *filp, unsigned char *cmd) > { > struct sg_fd *sfp = filp->private_data; > @@ -393,6 +411,12 @@ sg_read(struct file *filp, char __user *buf, size_t count, loff_t * ppos) > struct sg_header *old_hdr = NULL; > int retval = 0; > > + if (!sg_safe_file_access(filp)) { > + pr_err_once("%s: process %d (%s) changed security contexts after opening file descriptor, this is not allowed.\n", > + __func__, task_tgid_vnr(current), current->comm); > + return -EINVAL; The error message and returned code apply to the (filp->f_cred == current_cred()) case, not so much to !uaccess_kernel(). While on the error path could you not break out the !uaccess_kernel() with an appropriate error message and a return code of -EACCES ? Perhaps a message is unneeded since EACCES is clear. Not that wild about EINVAL either since it suggests (to me) a "front end" error (e.g. associated with a badly formed request). How about EPERM for the changing credentials case. And could I suggest a comment in the code along these lines: /* * This could cause a response to be stranded. Close the associated * file descriptor to free up any resources being held. */ > + } > + > if ((!(sfp = (Sg_fd *) filp->private_data)) || (!(sdp = sfp->parentdp))) > return -ENXIO; > SCSI_LOG_TIMEOUT(3, sg_printk(KERN_INFO, sdp, > @@ -581,8 +605,11 @@ sg_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf, size_t count, loff_t * ppos) > sg_io_hdr_t *hp; > unsigned char cmnd[SG_MAX_CDB_SIZE]; > > - if (unlikely(uaccess_kernel())) > + if (!sg_safe_file_access(filp)) { > + pr_err_once("%s: process %d (%s) changed security contexts after opening file descriptor, this is not allowed.\n", > + __func__, task_tgid_vnr(current), current->comm); > return -EINVAL; Same comments as above. Doug Gilbert > + } > > if ((!(sfp = (Sg_fd *) filp->private_data)) || (!(sdp = sfp->parentdp))) > return -ENXIO; >
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.