From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>
Cc: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Matt Denton <mpdenton@google.com>,
Sargun Dhillon <sargun@sargun.me>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Chris Palmer <palmer@google.com>,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>,
Robert Sesek <rsesek@google.com>,
Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@google.com>,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] seccomp: notify user trap about unused filter
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 15:36:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202005271457.CF4BBB47@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200527215203.GE4153131@cisco>
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:52:03PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 02:43:49PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > (While I'm here -- why can there be only one listener per task? The
> > notifications are filter-specific, not task-specific?)
>
> Not sure what you mean here?
tatic struct file *init_listener(struct seccomp_filter *filter)
{
struct file *ret = ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
struct seccomp_filter *cur;
for (cur = current->seccomp.filter; cur; cur = cur->prev) {
if (cur->notif)
goto out;
}
...
/* Installing a second listener in the chain should EBUSY */
EXPECT_EQ(user_trap_syscall(__NR_getpid,
SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER),
-1);
EXPECT_EQ(errno, EBUSY);
Why does this limit exist? Since the fd is tied to a specific filter,
I don't see conflicts about having multiple USER_NOTIF filters on one
task -- the monitor's response will either fake it or continue it, so
there is no "composition" needed? I must be missing something.
> Maybe it's best to decouple them entirely, and have usage go back to
> just being the number of tasks, and introduce a new counter for
> notification fds.
But isn't that already tracked by the VFS? i.e. there is a one-to-one
mapping from the "struct file *" returned by "anon_inode_getfile()" and
the "struct filter" (though we do not presently save it in the filter)
and the VFS tracks how many userspace fds are attached to that struct
file via ->f_count (i.e. f_count reaching zero is what triggers calling
seccomp_notify_release()).
In trying to write up an example patch for this, though, yeah, I don't
see how to do the locking. There is the "file" part, which is effectively
held by both any task's fd table and by the seccomp filter.
I suspect the issue is that the private_data can't be the
seccomp_filter. The "validity" of the mapping between kernel and user
needs to be tracked externally:
struct seccomp_notification_pipe
{
struct filter *filter;
struct file *file;
};
But I still can't see where to put the lock or refcount....
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-27 22:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-27 11:19 [PATCH 1/2] seccomp: notify user trap about unused filter Christian Brauner
2020-05-27 11:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] tests: test seccomp filter notifications Christian Brauner
2020-05-27 15:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] seccomp: notify user trap about unused filter Tycho Andersen
2020-05-27 15:35 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-27 17:37 ` Sargun Dhillon
2020-05-27 19:13 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-27 21:43 ` Kees Cook
2020-05-27 21:52 ` Tycho Andersen
2020-05-27 22:36 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2020-05-27 22:56 ` Tycho Andersen
2020-05-28 1:50 ` Kees Cook
2020-05-27 22:05 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-27 22:37 ` Kees Cook
2020-05-27 22:45 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-27 23:16 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-28 1:59 ` Kees Cook
2020-05-28 4:14 ` Jann Horn
2020-05-28 14:16 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-28 14:39 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-28 1:49 ` Kees Cook
2020-05-28 4:04 ` Jann Horn
2020-05-28 9:57 ` Christian Brauner
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=202005271457.CF4BBB47@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jeffv@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mpdenton@google.com \
--cc=palmer@google.com \
--cc=rsesek@google.com \
--cc=sargun@sargun.me \
--cc=tycho@tycho.ws \
/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