Re: [PATCH v3] exec: load_script: Do not exec truncated interpreter path

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>]

On 02/14, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> --- a/fs/binfmt_script.c
> +++ b/fs/binfmt_script.c
> @@ -42,9 +42,18 @@ static int load_script(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
>         fput(bprm->file);
>         bprm->file = NULL;
>
> -       bprm->buf[BINPRM_BUF_SIZE - 1] = '\0';
> -       if ((cp = strchr(bprm->buf, '\n')) == NULL)
> -               cp = bprm->buf+BINPRM_BUF_SIZE-1;
> +       if ((cp = strnchr(bprm->buf, BINPRM_BUF_SIZE, '\n')) == NULL) {
> +               bool truncated = true;
> +
> +               for (cp = bprm->buf+2; cp < bprm->buf+BINPRM_BUF_SIZE-1 &&
> +                                      ((*cp == ' ') || (*cp == '\t')); cp++);
> +               for (; cp < bprm->buf+BINPRM_BUF_SIZE-1; cp++) {
> +                       if ((*cp == ' ') || (*cp == '\t'))
> +                               truncated = false;
> +               }
> +               if (truncated)
> +                       return -ENOEXEC; /* Interpreter truncated */

Not sure. Consider a script file which has a single line

	#!/path/to/interpreter

WITHOUT '\n' at the end. If I read load_script() correctly it should work,
so I think the 2nd for() loop should also reset "truncated" if *cp == '\0'.

Hmm. And cp < bprm->buf+BINPRM_BUF_SIZE-1 is off-by-one again...

Well. Probably nobody does this... but after regression caused by my patch
I am not 100% sure ;)

Oleg.