Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:59:51 +0200 | From | Thomas Bogendoerfer <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Prevent READ_IMPLIES_EXEC propagation |
| |
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 05:39:01PM +0800, Tiezhu Yang wrote: > In the MIPS architecture, we should clear the security-relevant > flag READ_IMPLIES_EXEC in the function SET_PERSONALITY2() of the > file arch/mips/include/asm/elf.h. > > Otherwise, with this flag set, PROT_READ implies PROT_EXEC for > mmap to make memory executable that is not safe, because this > condition allows an attacker to simply jump to and execute bytes > that are considered to be just data [1]. > > In mm/mmap.c: > unsigned long do_mmap(struct file *file, unsigned long addr, > unsigned long len, unsigned long prot, > unsigned long flags, vm_flags_t vm_flags, > unsigned long pgoff, unsigned long *populate, > struct list_head *uf) > { > [...] > if ((prot & PROT_READ) && (current->personality & READ_IMPLIES_EXEC)) > if (!(file && path_noexec(&file->f_path))) > prot |= PROT_EXEC; > [...] > } > > By the way, x86 and ARM64 have done the similar thing. > > After commit 250c22777fe1 ("x86_64: move kernel"), in the file > arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c: > void set_personality_64bit(void) > { > [...] > current->personality &= ~READ_IMPLIES_EXEC; > } > > After commit 48f99c8ec0b2 ("arm64: Preventing READ_IMPLIES_EXEC > propagation"), in the file arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h: > #define SET_PERSONALITY(ex) \ > ({ \ > clear_thread_flag(TIF_32BIT); \ > current->personality &= ~READ_IMPLIES_EXEC; \ > }) > > [1] https://insights.sei.cmu.edu/cert/2014/02/feeling-insecure-blame-your-parent.html > > Reported-by: Juxin Gao <gaojuxin@loongson.cn> > Co-developed-by: Juxin Gao <gaojuxin@loongson.cn> > Signed-off-by: Juxin Gao <gaojuxin@loongson.cn> > Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn> > --- > arch/mips/include/asm/elf.h | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
applied to mips-next.
Thomas.
-- Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]
| |