From: Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@gmail.com>,
Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@0pointer.de>,
Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] elf: Move note processing after l_phdr is updated [BZ #26831]
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 15:04:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201103150412.GA24704@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOpmiiBEZqLz-94_MEwgRky+EUsfd=X6Ue30H2c9R=dSKQ@mail.gmail.com>
The 11/03/2020 04:36, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 2:38 AM Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
> > * Szabolcs Nagy:
> >
> > > Program headers are processed in two pass: after the first pass
> > > load segments are mmapped so in the second pass target specific
> > > note processing logic can access the notes.
> > >
> > > The second pass is moved later so various link_map fields are
> > > set up that may be useful for note processing such as l_phdr.
> > > ---
> > > elf/dl-load.c | 30 +++++++++++++++---------------
> > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/elf/dl-load.c b/elf/dl-load.c
> > > index ceaab7f18e..673cf960a0 100644
> > > --- a/elf/dl-load.c
> > > +++ b/elf/dl-load.c
> > > @@ -1259,21 +1259,6 @@ _dl_map_object_from_fd (const char *name, const char *origname, int fd,
> > > maplength, has_holes, loader);
> > > if (__glibc_unlikely (errstring != NULL))
> > > goto call_lose;
> > > -
> > > - /* Process program headers again after load segments are mapped in
> > > - case processing requires accessing those segments. Scan program
> > > - headers backward so that PT_NOTE can be skipped if PT_GNU_PROPERTY
> > > - exits. */
> > > - for (ph = &phdr[l->l_phnum]; ph != phdr; --ph)
> > > - switch (ph[-1].p_type)
> > > - {
> > > - case PT_NOTE:
> > > - _dl_process_pt_note (l, fd, &ph[-1]);
> > > - break;
> > > - case PT_GNU_PROPERTY:
> > > - _dl_process_pt_gnu_property (l, fd, &ph[-1]);
> > > - break;
> > > - }
> > > }
> > >
> > > if (l->l_ld == 0)
> > > @@ -1481,6 +1466,21 @@ cannot enable executable stack as shared object requires");
> > > /* Assign the next available module ID. */
> > > l->l_tls_modid = _dl_next_tls_modid ();
> > >
> > > + /* Process program headers again after load segments are mapped in
> > > + case processing requires accessing those segments. Scan program
> > > + headers backward so that PT_NOTE can be skipped if PT_GNU_PROPERTY
> > > + exits. */
> > > + for (ph = &l->l_phdr[l->l_phnum]; ph != l->l_phdr; --ph)
> > > + switch (ph[-1].p_type)
> > > + {
> > > + case PT_NOTE:
> > > + _dl_process_pt_note (l, fd, &ph[-1]);
> > > + break;
> > > + case PT_GNU_PROPERTY:
> > > + _dl_process_pt_gnu_property (l, fd, &ph[-1]);
> > > + break;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > #ifdef DL_AFTER_LOAD
> > > DL_AFTER_LOAD (l);
> > > #endif
> >
> > Is this still compatible with the CET requirements?
> >
> > I hope it is because the CET magic happens in _dl_open_check, so after
> > the the code in elf/dl-load.c has run.
i believe the note processing and later cet magic
are not affected by this code move.
but i did not test this with cet.
>
> _dl_process_pt_note and _dl_process_pt_gnu_property may call
> _dl_signal_error. Are we prepared to clean more things up when it
> happens? I am investigating:
yeah, this is difficult to reason about.
it seems to me that after _dl_map_object returns there
may be _dl_map_object_deps which can fail in a way that
all of dlopen has to be rolled back, so if i move things
around in _dl_map_object that should not introduce new
issues.
but it is not clear to me how robust the dlopen code is
against arbitrary failure in dl_open_worker.
>
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26825
>
> I don't think cleanup of _dl_process_pt_gnu_property failure is done
> properly.
>
> --
> H.J.
--
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@gmail.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@0pointer.de>,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@gmail.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] elf: Move note processing after l_phdr is updated [BZ #26831]
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 15:04:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201103150412.GA24704@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOpmiiBEZqLz-94_MEwgRky+EUsfd=X6Ue30H2c9R=dSKQ@mail.gmail.com>
The 11/03/2020 04:36, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 2:38 AM Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
> > * Szabolcs Nagy:
> >
> > > Program headers are processed in two pass: after the first pass
> > > load segments are mmapped so in the second pass target specific
> > > note processing logic can access the notes.
> > >
> > > The second pass is moved later so various link_map fields are
> > > set up that may be useful for note processing such as l_phdr.
> > > ---
> > > elf/dl-load.c | 30 +++++++++++++++---------------
> > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/elf/dl-load.c b/elf/dl-load.c
> > > index ceaab7f18e..673cf960a0 100644
> > > --- a/elf/dl-load.c
> > > +++ b/elf/dl-load.c
> > > @@ -1259,21 +1259,6 @@ _dl_map_object_from_fd (const char *name, const char *origname, int fd,
> > > maplength, has_holes, loader);
> > > if (__glibc_unlikely (errstring != NULL))
> > > goto call_lose;
> > > -
> > > - /* Process program headers again after load segments are mapped in
> > > - case processing requires accessing those segments. Scan program
> > > - headers backward so that PT_NOTE can be skipped if PT_GNU_PROPERTY
> > > - exits. */
> > > - for (ph = &phdr[l->l_phnum]; ph != phdr; --ph)
> > > - switch (ph[-1].p_type)
> > > - {
> > > - case PT_NOTE:
> > > - _dl_process_pt_note (l, fd, &ph[-1]);
> > > - break;
> > > - case PT_GNU_PROPERTY:
> > > - _dl_process_pt_gnu_property (l, fd, &ph[-1]);
> > > - break;
> > > - }
> > > }
> > >
> > > if (l->l_ld == 0)
> > > @@ -1481,6 +1466,21 @@ cannot enable executable stack as shared object requires");
> > > /* Assign the next available module ID. */
> > > l->l_tls_modid = _dl_next_tls_modid ();
> > >
> > > + /* Process program headers again after load segments are mapped in
> > > + case processing requires accessing those segments. Scan program
> > > + headers backward so that PT_NOTE can be skipped if PT_GNU_PROPERTY
> > > + exits. */
> > > + for (ph = &l->l_phdr[l->l_phnum]; ph != l->l_phdr; --ph)
> > > + switch (ph[-1].p_type)
> > > + {
> > > + case PT_NOTE:
> > > + _dl_process_pt_note (l, fd, &ph[-1]);
> > > + break;
> > > + case PT_GNU_PROPERTY:
> > > + _dl_process_pt_gnu_property (l, fd, &ph[-1]);
> > > + break;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > #ifdef DL_AFTER_LOAD
> > > DL_AFTER_LOAD (l);
> > > #endif
> >
> > Is this still compatible with the CET requirements?
> >
> > I hope it is because the CET magic happens in _dl_open_check, so after
> > the the code in elf/dl-load.c has run.
i believe the note processing and later cet magic
are not affected by this code move.
but i did not test this with cet.
>
> _dl_process_pt_note and _dl_process_pt_gnu_property may call
> _dl_signal_error. Are we prepared to clean more things up when it
> happens? I am investigating:
yeah, this is difficult to reason about.
it seems to me that after _dl_map_object returns there
may be _dl_map_object_deps which can fail in a way that
all of dlopen has to be rolled back, so if i move things
around in _dl_map_object that should not introduce new
issues.
but it is not clear to me how robust the dlopen code is
against arbitrary failure in dl_open_worker.
>
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26825
>
> I don't think cleanup of _dl_process_pt_gnu_property failure is done
> properly.
>
> --
> H.J.
--
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-03 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-03 10:25 [PATCH 0/4] aarch64: avoid mprotect(PROT_BTI|PROT_EXEC) [BZ #26831] Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 10:25 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 10:25 ` [PATCH 1/4] elf: Pass the fd to note processing " Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 10:25 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 10:26 ` [PATCH 2/4] elf: Move note processing after l_phdr is updated " Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 10:26 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 10:38 ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-03 10:38 ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-03 12:36 ` H.J. Lu
2020-11-03 12:36 ` H.J. Lu
2020-11-03 15:04 ` Szabolcs Nagy [this message]
2020-11-03 15:04 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 15:27 ` H.J. Lu
2020-11-03 15:27 ` H.J. Lu
2020-11-03 10:26 ` [PATCH 3/4] aarch64: Use mmap to add PROT_BTI instead of mprotect " Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 10:26 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 10:34 ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-03 10:34 ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-03 10:26 ` [PATCH 4/4] aarch64: Remove the bti link_map field " Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 10:26 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-03 17:34 ` [PATCH 0/4] aarch64: avoid mprotect(PROT_BTI|PROT_EXEC) " Mark Brown
2020-11-03 17:34 ` Mark Brown
2020-11-04 5:41 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-11-04 5:41 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-11-04 8:57 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-04 8:57 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-04 14:41 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-04 14:41 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-04 14:45 ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-04 14:45 ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-04 10:50 ` Mark Brown
2020-11-04 10:50 ` Mark Brown
2020-11-04 18:47 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-11-04 18:47 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-11-04 18:53 ` Mark Brown
2020-11-04 18:53 ` Mark Brown
2020-11-04 9:02 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-11-04 9:02 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-11-04 9:20 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-04 9:20 ` Will Deacon
2020-11-04 9:29 ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-04 9:29 ` Florian Weimer
2020-11-04 9:55 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-11-04 9:55 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-11-04 14:35 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-04 14:35 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-04 15:19 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-11-04 15:19 ` Topi Miettinen
2020-11-04 16:08 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-04 16:08 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-04 15:20 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-04 15:20 ` Mark Rutland
2020-11-04 18:59 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-11-04 18:59 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-11-05 11:31 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-05 11:31 ` Szabolcs Nagy
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=20201103150412.GA24704@arm.com \
--to=szabolcs.nagy@arm.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mzxreary@0pointer.de \
--cc=s.mesoraca16@gmail.com \
--cc=toiwoton@gmail.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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.