All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Qualys Security Advisory <qsa@qualys.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Subject: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH] exec: Account for argv/envp pointers
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 17:17:20 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170622001720.GA32173@beast> (raw)

When limiting the argv/envp strings during exec to 1/4 of the stack limit,
the storage of the pointers to the strings was not included. This means
that an exec with huge numbers of tiny strings could eat 1/4 of the
stack limit in strings and then additional space would be later used
by the pointers to the strings. For example, on 32-bit with a 8MB stack
rlimit, an exec with 1677721 single-byte strings would consume less than
2MB of stack, the max (8MB / 4) amount allowed, but the pointers to the
strings would consume the remaining additional stack space (1677721 *
4 == 6710884). The result (1677721 + 6710884 == 8388605) would exhaust
stack space entirely. Controlling this stack exhaustion could result in
pathological behavior in setuid binaries (CVE-2017-1000365).

Fixes: b6a2fea39318 ("mm: variable length argument support")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
 fs/exec.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
index 72934df68471..8079ca70cfda 100644
--- a/fs/exec.c
+++ b/fs/exec.c
@@ -220,8 +220,18 @@ static struct page *get_arg_page(struct linux_binprm *bprm, unsigned long pos,
 
 	if (write) {
 		unsigned long size = bprm->vma->vm_end - bprm->vma->vm_start;
+		unsigned long ptr_size;
 		struct rlimit *rlim;
 
+		/*
+		 * Since the stack will hold pointers to the strings, we
+		 * must account for them as well.
+		 */
+		ptr_size = (bprm->argc + bprm->envc) * sizeof(void *);
+		if (ptr_size > ULONG_MAX - size)
+			goto fail;
+		size += ptr_size;
+
 		acct_arg_size(bprm, size / PAGE_SIZE);
 
 		/*
@@ -239,13 +249,15 @@ static struct page *get_arg_page(struct linux_binprm *bprm, unsigned long pos,
 		 *    to work from.
 		 */
 		rlim = current->signal->rlim;
-		if (size > ACCESS_ONCE(rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_cur) / 4) {
-			put_page(page);
-			return NULL;
-		}
+		if (size > READ_ONCE(rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_cur) / 4)
+			goto fail;
 	}
 
 	return page;
+
+fail:
+	put_page(page);
+	return NULL;
 }
 
 static void put_arg_page(struct page *page)
-- 
2.7.4


-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Qualys Security Advisory <qsa@qualys.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Subject: [PATCH] exec: Account for argv/envp pointers
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 17:17:20 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170622001720.GA32173@beast> (raw)

When limiting the argv/envp strings during exec to 1/4 of the stack limit,
the storage of the pointers to the strings was not included. This means
that an exec with huge numbers of tiny strings could eat 1/4 of the
stack limit in strings and then additional space would be later used
by the pointers to the strings. For example, on 32-bit with a 8MB stack
rlimit, an exec with 1677721 single-byte strings would consume less than
2MB of stack, the max (8MB / 4) amount allowed, but the pointers to the
strings would consume the remaining additional stack space (1677721 *
4 == 6710884). The result (1677721 + 6710884 == 8388605) would exhaust
stack space entirely. Controlling this stack exhaustion could result in
pathological behavior in setuid binaries (CVE-2017-1000365).

Fixes: b6a2fea39318 ("mm: variable length argument support")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
 fs/exec.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
index 72934df68471..8079ca70cfda 100644
--- a/fs/exec.c
+++ b/fs/exec.c
@@ -220,8 +220,18 @@ static struct page *get_arg_page(struct linux_binprm *bprm, unsigned long pos,
 
 	if (write) {
 		unsigned long size = bprm->vma->vm_end - bprm->vma->vm_start;
+		unsigned long ptr_size;
 		struct rlimit *rlim;
 
+		/*
+		 * Since the stack will hold pointers to the strings, we
+		 * must account for them as well.
+		 */
+		ptr_size = (bprm->argc + bprm->envc) * sizeof(void *);
+		if (ptr_size > ULONG_MAX - size)
+			goto fail;
+		size += ptr_size;
+
 		acct_arg_size(bprm, size / PAGE_SIZE);
 
 		/*
@@ -239,13 +249,15 @@ static struct page *get_arg_page(struct linux_binprm *bprm, unsigned long pos,
 		 *    to work from.
 		 */
 		rlim = current->signal->rlim;
-		if (size > ACCESS_ONCE(rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_cur) / 4) {
-			put_page(page);
-			return NULL;
-		}
+		if (size > READ_ONCE(rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_cur) / 4)
+			goto fail;
 	}
 
 	return page;
+
+fail:
+	put_page(page);
+	return NULL;
 }
 
 static void put_arg_page(struct page *page)
-- 
2.7.4


-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Qualys Security Advisory <qsa@qualys.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Subject: [PATCH] exec: Account for argv/envp pointers
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 17:17:20 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170622001720.GA32173@beast> (raw)

When limiting the argv/envp strings during exec to 1/4 of the stack limit,
the storage of the pointers to the strings was not included. This means
that an exec with huge numbers of tiny strings could eat 1/4 of the
stack limit in strings and then additional space would be later used
by the pointers to the strings. For example, on 32-bit with a 8MB stack
rlimit, an exec with 1677721 single-byte strings would consume less than
2MB of stack, the max (8MB / 4) amount allowed, but the pointers to the
strings would consume the remaining additional stack space (1677721 *
4 == 6710884). The result (1677721 + 6710884 == 8388605) would exhaust
stack space entirely. Controlling this stack exhaustion could result in
pathological behavior in setuid binaries (CVE-2017-1000365).

Fixes: b6a2fea39318 ("mm: variable length argument support")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
 fs/exec.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
index 72934df68471..8079ca70cfda 100644
--- a/fs/exec.c
+++ b/fs/exec.c
@@ -220,8 +220,18 @@ static struct page *get_arg_page(struct linux_binprm *bprm, unsigned long pos,
 
 	if (write) {
 		unsigned long size = bprm->vma->vm_end - bprm->vma->vm_start;
+		unsigned long ptr_size;
 		struct rlimit *rlim;
 
+		/*
+		 * Since the stack will hold pointers to the strings, we
+		 * must account for them as well.
+		 */
+		ptr_size = (bprm->argc + bprm->envc) * sizeof(void *);
+		if (ptr_size > ULONG_MAX - size)
+			goto fail;
+		size += ptr_size;
+
 		acct_arg_size(bprm, size / PAGE_SIZE);
 
 		/*
@@ -239,13 +249,15 @@ static struct page *get_arg_page(struct linux_binprm *bprm, unsigned long pos,
 		 *    to work from.
 		 */
 		rlim = current->signal->rlim;
-		if (size > ACCESS_ONCE(rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_cur) / 4) {
-			put_page(page);
-			return NULL;
-		}
+		if (size > READ_ONCE(rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_cur) / 4)
+			goto fail;
 	}
 
 	return page;
+
+fail:
+	put_page(page);
+	return NULL;
 }
 
 static void put_arg_page(struct page *page)
-- 
2.7.4


-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security

             reply	other threads:[~2017-06-22  0:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-22  0:17 Kees Cook [this message]
2017-06-22  0:17 ` [PATCH] exec: Account for argv/envp pointers Kees Cook
2017-06-22  0:17 ` Kees Cook
2017-06-22  1:39 ` [kernel-hardening] " Rik van Riel
2017-06-22  1:39   ` Rik van Riel
2017-06-23 13:59 ` [kernel-hardening] " Michal Hocko
2017-06-23 13:59   ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-23 13:59   ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-23 14:05   ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2017-06-23 14:05     ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 14:05     ` Kees Cook
2017-06-23 14:18     ` [kernel-hardening] " Michal Hocko
2017-06-23 14:18       ` Michal Hocko
2017-06-23 14:18       ` Michal Hocko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170622001720.GA32173@beast \
    --to=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=qsa@qualys.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.