From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com>,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, shuah@kernel.org,
linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Subject: [PATCH 0/1] SGX self test fails
Date: Tue, 4 May 2021 01:37:01 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YJB7DZHDeNujIY+F@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6645d579-57f9-7adf-8a3d-f4fb2316b324@intel.com>
On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 09:39:05AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 5/3/21 8:41 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >> $ ls -l /dev/sgx_enclave
> >> crw------- 1 dave dave 10, 125 Apr 28 11:32 /dev/sgx_enclave
> >> $ ./test_sgx
> >> 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000002000 0x03
> >> 0x0000000000002000 0x0000000000001000 0x05
> >> 0x0000000000003000 0x0000000000003000 0x03
> >> SUCCESS
> >>
> >> *But*, is that OK? Should we be happily creating a PROT_EXEC mapping on
> >> a ugo-x file? Why were we respecting noexec on the filesystem but not
> >> ugo-x on the file?
> > Yeah, this supports my earlier response:
> >
> > "EPERM The prot argument asks for PROT_EXEC but the mapped area
> > belongs to a file on a filesystem that was mounted no-exec."
> > https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/mmap.2.html
> >
> > I guess the right model is to think just as "anonymous memory"
> > with equivalent access control semantics after succesfully
> > opened for read and write.
>
> I guess I'll answer my own question: The "x" bit on file permissions
> really only controls the ability for the file to be execve()'d, but has
> no bearing on the ability for an executable *mapping* to be created.
> This is existing VFS behavior and is not specific to SGX.
Yeah, that's nicely put it into one sentence :-)
> I think I'll just send a patch to pull that warning out.
/Jarkko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-03 22:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-29 18:39 Subject: [PATCH 0/1] SGX self test fails Tim Gardner
2021-04-29 18:39 ` [PATCH] selftests/sgx: Defeat execute permissions test Tim Gardner
2021-04-29 18:55 ` Subject: [PATCH 0/1] SGX self test fails Dave Hansen
2021-04-30 9:25 ` Dr. Greg
2021-05-03 15:41 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-05-03 16:39 ` Dave Hansen
2021-05-03 22:37 ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
2021-05-03 15:38 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
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=YJB7DZHDeNujIY+F@kernel.org \
--to=jarkko@kernel.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tim.gardner@canonical.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