[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] lib/string: avoid reading beyond src buffer in strscpy
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Dmitry Vyukov <> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Andrey Ryabinin <> wrote:
>> On 12/07/2017 09:26 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Eryu Guan <> wrote:
>>>> strscpy() tries to copy sizeof(unsigned long) bytes a time from src
>>>> to dest when possible, and stops the loop when 'max' is less than
>>>> sizeof(unsigned long). But it doesn't check if (src+res) goes beyond
>>>> src buffer and does out-of-bound access to the underlying memory.
>>>> KASAN reported global-out-of-bound bug when reading seccomp
>>>> actions_logged file in procfs:
>>>> cat /proc/sys/kernel/seccomp/actions_logged
>>>> Because seccomp_names_from_actions_logged() is copying short strings
>>>> (less than sizeof(unsigned long)) to buffer 'names'. e.g.
>>>> ret = strscpy(names, " ", size);
>>> This is a false positive:
>>> Given that we keep getting these reports (this is the third), I wonder
>>> if can adjust the seccomp code to work around the bug in KASAN...
>> We should fix this in strscpy() somehow. We just need to decide how to do this.
>> Last time we haven't came to agreement.
>> So, possible solutions are:
>> 1) Simply disable word-at-a-time optimization in strscpy(). I seriously doubt
>> that this optimization have noticeable performance impact in real workloads.
>> 2) Apply patch
>> It's a simple, minimally intrusive way to fix the bug.
>> However, the patch changes semantics/implementation of the strscpy() which is bad idea.
>> It basically means that we use one implementation of the strscpy() but test with KASAN another implementation.
>> For that reason patch wasn't liked by Linus.
>> 3) Introduce read_once_partial_check() function and use it in strscpy().
>> read_once_partial_check() supposed to read one word, but KASAN will check only the first byte of the access.
>> Dmitry didn't like this. I'm also not fan of this solution, because we may not notice some real bugs, e.g.:
>> char dst[8];
>> char *src;
>> src = kmalloc(5, GFP_KERNEL);
>> memset(src, 0xff, 5);
>> strscpy(dst, src, 8);
>> stscpy() will copy from 6 up to 8 bytes (exact size depends on what is stored in src[5-7])
>> from non-null terminated src. With read_once_partial_check() used in strscpy() KASAN will
>> not report such bug.
>> So, what it's gonna be? Let's finally decide something and deal with the problem.
>> My vote belongs to 1) or 2).
> My vote is for 1) if we agree that the optimization is not worth it,
> otherwise for 2).

Who would be the best person to measure the difference for 1)?


Kees Cook
Pixel Security

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-08 21:55    [W:0.076 / U:6.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site