From: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
To: Jann Horn <jann@thejh.net>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] kernel/panic: place an upper limit on number of oopses
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:34:39 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mvsa5q40.fsf@gamma.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1452626745-31708-1-git-send-email-jann@thejh.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2799 bytes --]
Jann Horn <jann@thejh.net> writes:
> To prevent an attacker from turning a mostly harmless oops into an
> exploitable issue using a refcounter wraparound caused by repeated
> oopsing, limit the number of oopses.
>
> I have not experimentally verified whether the attack I describe
> in the comment works, but I don't see why it wouldn't.
> (f_count increments through fget() use atomic_long_inc_not_zero(),
> but get_file() just does a normal increment and is e.g.
> used by dup_fd().)
>
> This approach is strictly inferior to PAX_REFCOUNT, but as long
> as that's not upstreamed and turned on by default, it might make
> sense to at least use this patch.
>
> Opinions?
I'm torn between making the limit configurable and not adding to the
massive proliferation of config options.
Other comments below.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jann@thejh.net>
> ---
> kernel/panic.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/panic.c b/kernel/panic.c
> index 4b150bc..27a480d 100644
> --- a/kernel/panic.c
> +++ b/kernel/panic.c
> @@ -422,9 +422,37 @@ void print_oops_end_marker(void)
> */
> void oops_exit(void)
> {
> + static atomic_t oops_counter = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
> +
> do_oops_enter_exit();
> print_oops_end_marker();
> kmsg_dump(KMSG_DUMP_OOPS);
> +
> + /*
> + * Every time the system oopses, if the oops happens while a
> + * reference to an object was held (e.g. in a VFS function),
> + * the reference leaks. If the oops doesn't also leak memory,
> + * repeated oopsing can cause the reference counter to wrap
> + * around - in particular, on 32bit systems, f_count in
> + * struct file is only 32 bits long and can realistically
> + * wrap around.
> + * This means that an oops, even if it's just caused by an
> + * unexploitable-looking NULL pointer dereference or so,
> + * could maybe be turned into a use-after-free through a
> + * counter overincrement, and a use-after-free might be
> + * exploitable.
> + * To reduce the probability that this happens, place an
> + * upper bound on how often the kernel may oops - after this
> + * limit is reached, just panic.
> + * The constant used as limit should be low enough to
> + * mitigate this kind of exploitation attempt, but high
> + * enough to avoid unnecessary panics.
> + */
> + if (atomic_inc_return(&oops_counter) >= 0x100000 &&
> + panic_on_oops == 0) {
Do you need to check panic_on_oops? If it was 1 you'd already have
paniced, right?
> + pr_emerg("oopsed too often, setting panic_on_oops=1\n");
> + panic_on_oops = 1;
Would it be easier to just panic here, rather than wait for another oops?
> + }
> }
>
> #ifdef WANT_WARN_ON_SLOWPATH
Regards,
Daniel
> --
> 2.1.4
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 859 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-12 23:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-12 19:25 [RFC] kernel/panic: place an upper limit on number of oopses Jann Horn
2016-01-12 23:34 ` Daniel Axtens [this message]
2016-01-12 23:51 ` Jann Horn
2016-01-13 0:20 ` Solar Designer
2016-01-13 0:33 ` Daniel Axtens
2016-01-13 18:08 ` Jann Horn
2016-01-17 3:58 ` [kernel-hardening] " Jann Horn
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=87mvsa5q40.fsf@gamma.ozlabs.ibm.com \
--to=dja@axtens.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=jann@thejh.net \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.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