public inbox for kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>
To: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@openwall.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, daniel.lezcano@free.fr,
	ebiederm@xmission.com, mingo@elte.hu, oleg@redhat.com,
	rdunlap@xenotime.net, tj@kernel.org,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Subject: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH] shm: handle separate PID namespaces case
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 09:26:59 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110705142659.GA18290@peqn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110704115523.GA11252@albatros>

Quoting Vasiliy Kulikov (segoon@openwall.com):
> shm_try_destroy_orphaned() and shm_try_destroy_current() didn't handle
> the case of separate PID namespaces, but a single IPC namespace.  If
> there are tasks with the same PID values using the same shmem object,
> the wrong destroy decision could be reached.
> 
> On shm segment creation store the pointer to the creator task in
> shmid_kernel->shm_creator field and zero it on task exit.  Then
> use the ->shm_creator insread of ->shm_cprid in both functions.
> As shmid_kernel object is already locked at this stage, no additional
> locking is needed.

Thanks, Vasiliy.  Sounds like the Documentation/ file could stand some
clarification.

A concern below, though:

> Signed-off-by: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@openwall.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/shm.h |    3 +++
>  ipc/shm.c           |   27 ++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/shm.h b/include/linux/shm.h
> index b030a4e..12d2234 100644
> --- a/include/linux/shm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/shm.h
> @@ -95,6 +95,9 @@ struct shmid_kernel /* private to the kernel */
>  	pid_t			shm_cprid;
>  	pid_t			shm_lprid;
>  	struct user_struct	*mlock_user;
> +
> +	/* The task created the shm object.  NULL if the task is dead. */
> +	struct task_struct	*shm_creator;
>  };
>  
>  /* shm_mode upper byte flags */
> diff --git a/ipc/shm.c b/ipc/shm.c
> index 22006f1..3baae98 100644
> --- a/ipc/shm.c
> +++ b/ipc/shm.c
> @@ -239,7 +239,23 @@ static int shm_try_destroy_current(int id, void *p, void *data)
>  	if (IS_ERR(shp))
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	if (shp->shm_cprid != task_tgid_vnr(current)) {
> +	if (shp->shm_creator != current) {
> +		shm_unlock(shp);
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Mark it as orphaned to destroy the segment when
> +	 * kernel.shm_forced_rmid is changed.
> +	 * It is noop if the following shm_may_destroy() returns true.
> +	 */
> +	shp->shm_creator = NULL;

This function, shm_try_destroy_current(), only gets called by shm_exit()
if the shm_forced_rmid is set, right?  So something funky can happen if
first shm_forced_rmid is 0 and some get created and the creating tasks
exits, then shm_forced_rmid gets set to one, and the task pointer gets
reused?

Using a struct pid may still be the best bet.  It's much lighter-weight
than a task struct, so keeping a ref shouldn't much matter.  It'll
avoid this wraparound issue (assuming I'm not imagining that issue).
Struct pid is namespace-safe, and you can still do your simple, quick
pointer comparison.

> +	/*
> +	 * Don't even try to destroy it.  If shm_forced_rmid=0 and IPC_RMID
> +	 * is not set, it shouldn't be deleted here.
> +	 */
> +	if (!ns->shm_forced_rmid) {
>  		shm_unlock(shp);
>  		return 0;
>  	}
> @@ -255,7 +271,6 @@ static int shm_try_destroy_orphaned(int id, void *p, void *data)
>  {
>  	struct ipc_namespace *ns = data;
>  	struct shmid_kernel *shp = shm_lock(ns, id);
> -	struct task_struct *task;
>  
>  	if (IS_ERR(shp))
>  		return 0;
> @@ -263,11 +278,8 @@ static int shm_try_destroy_orphaned(int id, void *p, void *data)
>  	/*
>  	 * We want to destroy segments without users and with already
>  	 * exit'ed originating process.
> -	 *
> -	 * XXX: the originating process may exist in another pid namespace.
>  	 */
> -	task = find_task_by_vpid(shp->shm_cprid);
> -	if (task != NULL) {
> +	if (shp->shm_creator != NULL) {
>  		shm_unlock(shp);
>  		return 0;
>  	}
> @@ -295,7 +307,7 @@ void exit_shm(struct task_struct *task)
>  	if (!nsp)
>  		return;
>  	ns = nsp->ipc_ns;
> -	if (!ns || !ns->shm_forced_rmid)
> +	if (!ns)
>  		return;
>  
>  	/* Destroy all already created segments, but not mapped yet */
> @@ -494,6 +506,7 @@ static int newseg(struct ipc_namespace *ns, struct ipc_params *params)
>  	shp->shm_segsz = size;
>  	shp->shm_nattch = 0;
>  	shp->shm_file = file;
> +	shp->shm_creator = current;
>  	/*
>  	 * shmid gets reported as "inode#" in /proc/pid/maps.
>  	 * proc-ps tools use this. Changing this will break them.
> -- 
> 1.7.0.4

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-07-05 14:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <201106292214.p5TMEtHg015372@imap1.linux-foundation.org>
     [not found] ` <20110630134855.GA6165@mail.hallyn.com>
2011-06-30 13:57   ` [kernel-hardening] Re: + ipc-introduce-shm_rmid_forced-sysctl.patch added to -mm tree Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-03 18:00     ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-04 11:55       ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH] shm: handle separate PID namespaces case Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-04 15:05         ` [kernel-hardening] " Oleg Nesterov
2011-07-04 15:26           ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-04 15:37             ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-07-04 15:48               ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-04 17:01               ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH] shm: optimize locking and ipc_namespace getting Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-04 17:29                 ` [kernel-hardening] " Oleg Nesterov
2011-07-04 17:51                   ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-05 17:38                 ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH v2] " Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-05 17:37             ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH v2] shm: handle separate PID namespaces case Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-15  6:45               ` [kernel-hardening] " Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-05 14:26         ` Serge Hallyn [this message]
2011-07-05 14:50           ` [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH] " Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-05 15:57             ` Serge Hallyn
2011-07-05 17:42               ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-06 16:31                 ` Serge Hallyn
2011-07-06 16:57                   ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-06 18:08                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-07-06 18:35                       ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-05 17:29         ` Vasiliy Kulikov

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=20110705142659.GA18290@peqn \
    --to=serge.hallyn@canonical.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=daniel.lezcano@free.fr \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
    --cc=segoon@openwall.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox