From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pj1-f44.google.com (mail-pj1-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 881C7383BF for ; Fri, 24 May 2024 03:39:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.44 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716521995; cv=none; b=dL+K1mUSz8qOPZ/NKZrrUUh4yMezfapxWMrOJEggpLtV2mE+qNZSjDCnMRJmpsBVN/PtMSHloi2ldXQ73xKueKTQmIPTxLR9o4OYHOEu3MDSy0zHlsBUl2xxg+ER2JfKwT7wZwAbAxLkKXmELL9Lr4jlMfrmMfSDwxfHoXKnfMo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716521995; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kBlmceXG6bhkrmUXIGJbMc35HmIYYfFUgN5tK4gjObA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=jA4nIgJ1S11tMDGtbYFi8VtN1/PasDLMJH6XUKwsNvXZU1BIpE901+5oxFz5nSa6upBZWinTvT0PrjYHt14z7GpHOwUUIXUnA2OdjxtPfqPmi3drBF8J92+6DEL/G3ZyPXtVp9C1nzZcZJ3jLPU6lJ5HkebALoa0TdcxLasn5Dk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=chromium.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b=g2OAYEzM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.44 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=chromium.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="g2OAYEzM" Received: by mail-pj1-f44.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2bdefdeb545so934207a91.2 for ; Thu, 23 May 2024 20:39:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; t=1716521993; x=1717126793; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=pesQo+6XyB9Sz7NquWrLJtfwCa+DVcXbb+XOLlmmUJA=; b=g2OAYEzMp38m7n8GB//ncGBNaVPGIaNaj94Nwk2AsoIuFP8PhjypIjP8fWALYCe9EI 61YM/fzluz3imdsxA2MPJkGgBKDPoyDEi2A4+aU8L83h8iqVmENSdMOHmLI5M2dCmBpD fmxIiO8DLKlUIHv5UIXCSZkSJzXBSeMxNfF2s= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1716521993; x=1717126793; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=pesQo+6XyB9Sz7NquWrLJtfwCa+DVcXbb+XOLlmmUJA=; b=wwJGBjIy6eUDwOZoEAlwW6b3qvYHhDYVteb532geF8vgoHdXc6fwf8/L1H/SIOBSg4 L65kD/clsCSkWyElNo9amDBxYAOaK0ZVzquHAQGLlX9Kz15pfbYM9ZZSPHLUj1OasUKb nY7m5qY/uCYexwNHrFmSMDh1+b0oLDCwBmnyFFbTk4P8r8SPeCBNs090GBw0QncrxpUY re11OUwe/y5HgpOtkFEIhEpt81ioRnf0ldbBlLM517Xgmx0o0ALYfScNhaXtm0gV/lMf 1WV7/sHnWMN+F8BAR6sJPGzanUVdzdVJMoo6FqdmrKelzoob9344b1qwS1Au5K3Xjk2/ MNrg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWF8oVcnEnnaTvEfCoKuRYGE8dh3DA2lX/YXLbytbAQPFx2+PEAHX8LsOc7WW5kVUzq/5G6S1Hj0t8UppZf7KeWEQ8TRBzP X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzNB9V4qAUyn3ZLkQaP4U74/z0vLmAeHjiS+fyvTej4Idv4xBRH CniK55GzccFsfYO+rJBsIjtcK9T7GACyieefQaxTmG30oezU+xVjr8JQMr5IohQAur83El8K3wI = X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHdjBENRrBcj6qYEjj9L5n5wO1aZ+m3thRvOckQZLAGNspYj6ieCFrZ+b+e26D15nt1k6EE2w== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:604:b0:2b6:c650:fb54 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2bf5f50a0cdmr948929a91.49.1716521992881; Thu, 23 May 2024 20:39:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (197.59.83.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.83.59.197]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id 98e67ed59e1d1-2bf5f50c450sm406666a91.17.2024.05.23.20.39.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 23 May 2024 20:39:52 -0700 (PDT) From: jeffxu@chromium.org To: jeffxu@google.com Cc: jeffxu@chromium.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, cyphar@cyphar.com, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, dverkamp@chromium.org, hughd@google.com, jorgelo@chromium.org, keescook@chromium.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, pobrn@protonmail.com, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] memfd:add MEMFD_NOEXEC_SEAL documentation Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 03:39:31 +0000 Message-ID: <20240524033933.135049-3-jeffxu@google.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.45.1.288.g0e0cd299f1-goog In-Reply-To: <20240524033933.135049-1-jeffxu@google.com> References: <20240524033933.135049-1-jeffxu@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Jeff Xu Add documentation for MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL and MFD_EXEC Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Jeff Xu --- Documentation/userspace-api/index.rst | 1 + Documentation/userspace-api/mfd_noexec.rst | 90 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 91 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/userspace-api/mfd_noexec.rst diff --git a/Documentation/userspace-api/index.rst b/Documentation/userspace-api/index.rst index 5926115ec0ed..8a251d71fa6e 100644 --- a/Documentation/userspace-api/index.rst +++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/index.rst @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ Security-related interfaces seccomp_filter landlock lsm + mfd_noexec spec_ctrl tee diff --git a/Documentation/userspace-api/mfd_noexec.rst b/Documentation/userspace-api/mfd_noexec.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..6f11ad86b076 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/mfd_noexec.rst @@ -0,0 +1,90 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +================================== +Introduction of non executable mfd +================================== +:Author: + Daniel Verkamp + Jeff Xu + +:Contributor: + Aleksa Sarai + Barnabás Pőcze + David Rheinsberg + +Since Linux introduced the memfd feature, memfd have always had their +execute bit set, and the memfd_create() syscall doesn't allow setting +it differently. + +However, in a secure by default system, such as ChromeOS, (where all +executables should come from the rootfs, which is protected by Verified +boot), this executable nature of memfd opens a door for NoExec bypass +and enables “confused deputy attack”. E.g, in VRP bug [1]: cros_vm +process created a memfd to share the content with an external process, +however the memfd is overwritten and used for executing arbitrary code +and root escalation. [2] lists more VRP in this kind. + +On the other hand, executable memfd has its legit use, runc uses memfd’s +seal and executable feature to copy the contents of the binary then +execute them, for such system, we need a solution to differentiate runc's +use of executable memfds and an attacker's [3]. + +To address those above. + - Let memfd_create() set X bit at creation time. + - Let memfd be sealed for modifying X bit when NX is set. + - A new pid namespace sysctl: vm.memfd_noexec to help applications to + migrating and enforcing non-executable MFD. + +User API +======== +``int memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags)`` + +``MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL`` + When MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL bit is set in the ``flags``, memfd is created + with NX. F_SEAL_EXEC is set and the memfd can't be modified to + add X later. + This is the most common case for the application to use memfd. + +``MFD_EXEC`` + When MFD_EXEC bit is set in the ``flags``, memfd is created with X. + +Note: + ``MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL`` and ``MFD_EXEC`` doesn't change the sealable + characteristic of memfd, which is controlled by ``MFD_ALLOW_SEALING``. + + +Sysctl: +======== +``pid namespaced sysctl vm.memfd_noexec`` + +The new pid namespaced sysctl vm.memfd_noexec has 3 values: + + - 0: MEMFD_NOEXEC_SCOPE_EXEC + memfd_create() without MFD_EXEC nor MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL acts like + MFD_EXEC was set. + + - 1: MEMFD_NOEXEC_SCOPE_NOEXEC_SEAL + memfd_create() without MFD_EXEC nor MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL acts like + MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL was set. + + - 2: MEMFD_NOEXEC_SCOPE_NOEXEC_ENFORCED + memfd_create() without MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL will be rejected. + +The sysctl allows finer control of memfd_create for old-software that +doesn't set the executable bit, for example, a container with +vm.memfd_noexec=1 means the old-software will create non-executable memfd +by default while new-software can create executable memfd by setting +MFD_EXEC. + +The value of memfd_noexec is passed to child namespace at creation time, +in addition, the setting is hierarchical, i.e. during memfd_create, +we will search from current ns to root ns and use the most restrictive +setting. + +Reference: +========== +[1] https://crbug.com/1305267 + +[2] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=type%3Dbug-security%20memfd%20escalation&can=1 + +[3] https://lwn.net/Articles/781013/ -- 2.45.1.288.g0e0cd299f1-goog