From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
Christian Heimes <christian@python.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>,
Eric Chiang <ericchiang@google.com>,
Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
James Morris <jamorris@linux.microsoft.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Jeff Xu <jeffxu@google.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Jordan R Abrahams <ajordanr@google.com>,
Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>,
Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
"Madhavan T . Venkataraman" <madvenka@linux.microsoft.com>,
Matt Bobrowski <mattbobrowski@google.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
Nicolas Bouchinet <nicolas.bouchinet@ssi.gouv.fr>,
Scott Shell <scottsh@microsoft.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Steve Dower <steve.dower@python.org>,
Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>,
Thibaut Sautereau <thibaut.sautereau@ssi.gouv.fr>,
Vincent Strubel <vincent.strubel@ssi.gouv.fr>,
Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@huawei.com>,
Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v19 1/5] exec: Add a new AT_CHECK flag to execveat(2)
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2024 17:32:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871q46bkoz.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240706.poo9ahd3La9b@digikod.net> ("Mickaël Salaün"'s message of "Sat, 6 Jul 2024 16:55:51 +0200")
* Mickaël Salaün:
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2024 at 08:03:14PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Mickaël Salaün:
>>
>> > Add a new AT_CHECK flag to execveat(2) to check if a file would be
>> > allowed for execution. The main use case is for script interpreters and
>> > dynamic linkers to check execution permission according to the kernel's
>> > security policy. Another use case is to add context to access logs e.g.,
>> > which script (instead of interpreter) accessed a file. As any
>> > executable code, scripts could also use this check [1].
>>
>> Some distributions no longer set executable bits on most shared objects,
>> which I assume would interfere with AT_CHECK probing for shared objects.
>
> A file without the execute permission is not considered as executable by
> the kernel. The AT_CHECK flag doesn't change this semantic. Please
> note that this is just a check, not a restriction. See the next patch
> for the optional policy enforcement.
>
> Anyway, we need to define the policy, and for Linux this is done with
> the file permission bits. So for systems willing to have a consistent
> execution policy, we need to rely on the same bits.
Yes, that makes complete sense. I just wanted to point out the odd
interaction with the old binutils bug and the (sadly still current)
kernel bug.
>> Removing the executable bit is attractive because of a combination of
>> two bugs: a binutils wart which until recently always set the entry
>> point address in the ELF header to zero, and the kernel not checking for
>> a zero entry point (maybe in combination with an absent program
>> interpreter) and failing the execve with ELIBEXEC, instead of doing the
>> execve and then faulting at virtual address zero. Removing the
>> executable bit is currently the only way to avoid these confusing
>> crashes, so I understand the temptation.
>
> Interesting. Can you please point to the bug report and the fix? I
> don't see any ELIBEXEC in the kernel.
The kernel hasn't been fixed yet. I do think this should be fixed, so
that distributions can bring back the executable bit.
Thanks,
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-06 15:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 102+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-04 19:01 [RFC PATCH v19 0/5] Script execution control (was O_MAYEXEC) Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-04 19:01 ` [RFC PATCH v19 1/5] exec: Add a new AT_CHECK flag to execveat(2) Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-05 0:04 ` Kees Cook
2024-07-05 17:53 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-08 19:38 ` Kees Cook
2024-07-05 18:03 ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-06 14:55 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-06 15:32 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2024-07-08 8:56 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-08 16:37 ` [PATCH] binfmt_elf: Fail execution of shared objects with ELIBEXEC (was: Re: [RFC PATCH v19 1/5] exec: Add a new AT_CHECK flag to execveat(2)) Florian Weimer
2024-07-08 17:34 ` [PATCH] binfmt_elf: Fail execution of shared objects with ELIBEXEC Eric W. Biederman
2024-07-08 17:59 ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-10 10:05 ` [PATCH] binfmt_elf: Fail execution of shared objects with ELIBEXEC (was: Re: [RFC PATCH v19 1/5] exec: Add a new AT_CHECK flag to execveat(2)) Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-08 16:08 ` [RFC PATCH v19 1/5] exec: Add a new AT_CHECK flag to execveat(2) Jeff Xu
2024-07-08 16:25 ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-08 16:40 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-08 17:05 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-08 17:33 ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-08 17:52 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-09 9:18 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-09 10:05 ` Florian Weimer
2024-07-09 20:42 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-09 18:57 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-09 20:41 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-06 8:52 ` Andy Lutomirski
2024-07-07 9:01 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-17 6:33 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-17 8:26 ` Steve Dower
2024-07-17 10:00 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-18 1:02 ` Andy Lutomirski
2024-07-18 12:22 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-20 1:59 ` Andy Lutomirski
2024-07-20 11:43 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2024-07-23 13:16 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-23 13:16 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-18 1:51 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-18 12:23 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-18 22:54 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-17 10:01 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-18 2:08 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-18 12:24 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-18 13:03 ` James Bottomley
2024-07-18 15:35 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-19 1:29 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-19 8:44 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-19 14:16 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-19 15:04 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-19 15:27 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-23 13:15 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-08-05 18:35 ` Jeff Xu
2024-08-09 8:45 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-08-09 16:15 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-19 15:12 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-19 15:31 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-19 17:36 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-23 13:15 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-18 14:46 ` enh
2024-07-18 15:35 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-04 19:01 ` [RFC PATCH v19 2/5] security: Add new SHOULD_EXEC_CHECK and SHOULD_EXEC_RESTRICT securebits Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-05 0:18 ` Kees Cook
2024-07-05 17:54 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-05 21:44 ` Kees Cook
2024-07-05 22:22 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2024-07-06 14:56 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-06 17:28 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2024-07-06 14:56 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-18 14:16 ` Roberto Sassu
2024-07-18 16:20 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-08 16:17 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-08 17:53 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-08 18:48 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-08 21:15 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-08 21:25 ` Steve Dower
2024-07-08 22:07 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-09 20:42 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-09 21:57 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-10 9:58 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-10 16:26 ` Kees Cook
2024-07-11 8:57 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-16 15:02 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-16 15:10 ` Steve Dower
2024-07-16 15:15 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-16 15:18 ` Jeff Xu
2024-07-10 16:32 ` Steve Dower
2024-07-20 2:06 ` Andy Lutomirski
2024-07-23 13:15 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-04 19:01 ` [RFC PATCH v19 3/5] selftests/exec: Add tests for AT_CHECK and related securebits Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-04 19:01 ` [RFC PATCH v19 4/5] selftests/landlock: Add tests for execveat + AT_CHECK Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-04 19:01 ` [RFC PATCH v19 5/5] samples/should-exec: Add set-should-exec Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-08 19:40 ` Mimi Zohar
2024-07-09 20:42 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-08 20:35 ` [RFC PATCH v19 0/5] Script execution control (was O_MAYEXEC) Mimi Zohar
2024-07-09 20:43 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-16 15:57 ` Roberto Sassu
2024-07-16 16:12 ` James Bottomley
2024-07-16 17:31 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-18 16:21 ` Mickaël Salaün
[not found] ` <E608EDB8-72E8-4791-AC9B-8FF9AC753FBE@sempervictus.com>
2024-07-16 17:47 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-17 17:59 ` Boris Lukashev
2024-07-18 13:00 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-07-15 20:16 ` Jonathan Corbet
2024-07-16 7:13 ` Mickaël Salaün
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=871q46bkoz.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com \
--to=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=ajordanr@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alx@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bluca@debian.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=christian@python.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=ericchiang@google.com \
--cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jamorris@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jeffxu@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=mattbobrowski@google.com \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=mic@digikod.net \
--cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=mszeredi@redhat.com \
--cc=nicolas.bouchinet@ssi.gouv.fr \
--cc=nixiaoming@huawei.com \
--cc=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=scottsh@microsoft.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=sgrubb@redhat.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=steve.dower@python.org \
--cc=thibaut.sautereau@ssi.gouv.fr \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=vincent.strubel@ssi.gouv.fr \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=wufan@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).