Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 22 Jul 2020 12:40:19 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To:     =?iso-8859-1?Q?Micka=EBl_Sala=FCn?= <mic@digikod.net>
Cc:     Thibaut Sautereau <thibaut.sautereau@clip-os.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
        Christian Heimes <christian@python.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>,
        Eric Chiang <ericchiang@google.com>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>,
        Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
        =?iso-8859-1?Q?Micka=EBl_Sala=FCn?= <mickael.salaun@ssi.gouv.fr>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
        Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Tr=E9buchet?= 
        <philippe.trebuchet@ssi.gouv.fr>,
        Scott Shell <scottsh@microsoft.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        Steve Dower <steve.dower@python.org>,
        Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Thibaut Sautereau <thibaut.sautereau@ssi.gouv.fr>,
        Vincent Strubel <vincent.strubel@ssi.gouv.fr>,
        kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/7] fs,doc: Enable to enforce noexec mounts or file
 exec through O_MAYEXEC
Message-ID: <202007221239.E00125F019@keescook>
References: <20200714181638.45751-1-mic@digikod.net>
 <20200714181638.45751-6-mic@digikod.net>
 <202007151312.C28D112013@keescook>
 <35ea0914-7360-43ab-e381-9614d18cceba@digikod.net>
 <20200722161639.GA24129@gandi.net>
 <efb88aab-f9f9-4b66-e7ab-3aa054eec96e@digikod.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <efb88aab-f9f9-4b66-e7ab-3aa054eec96e@digikod.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 09:04:28PM +0200, Micka?l Sala?n wrote:
> 
> On 22/07/2020 18:16, Thibaut Sautereau wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 04:39:14PM +0200, Micka?l Sala?n wrote:
> >>
> >> On 15/07/2020 22:37, Kees Cook wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 08:16:36PM +0200, Micka?l Sala?n wrote:
> >>>> @@ -2849,7 +2855,7 @@ static int may_open(const struct path *path, int acc_mode, int flag)
> >>>>  	case S_IFLNK:
> >>>>  		return -ELOOP;
> >>>>  	case S_IFDIR:
> >>>> -		if (acc_mode & (MAY_WRITE | MAY_EXEC))
> >>>> +		if (acc_mode & (MAY_WRITE | MAY_EXEC | MAY_OPENEXEC))
> >>>>  			return -EISDIR;
> >>>>  		break;
> >>>
> >>> (I need to figure out where "open for reading" rejects S_IFDIR, since
> >>> it's clearly not here...)
> > 
> > Doesn't it come from generic_read_dir() in fs/libfs.c?
> > 
> >>>
> >>>>  	case S_IFBLK:
> >>>> @@ -2859,13 +2865,26 @@ static int may_open(const struct path *path, int acc_mode, int flag)
> >>>>  		fallthrough;
> >>>>  	case S_IFIFO:
> >>>>  	case S_IFSOCK:
> >>>> -		if (acc_mode & MAY_EXEC)
> >>>> +		if (acc_mode & (MAY_EXEC | MAY_OPENEXEC))
> >>>>  			return -EACCES;
> >>>>  		flag &= ~O_TRUNC;
> >>>>  		break;
> >>>
> >>> This will immediately break a system that runs code with MAY_OPENEXEC
> >>> set but reads from a block, char, fifo, or socket, even in the case of
> >>> a sysadmin leaving the "file" sysctl disabled.
> >>
> >> As documented, O_MAYEXEC is for regular files. The only legitimate use
> >> case seems to be with pipes, which should probably be allowed when
> >> enforcement is disabled.
> > 
> > By the way Kees, while we fix that for the next series, do you think it
> > would be relevant, at least for the sake of clarity, to add a
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(acc_mode & MAY_OPENEXEC) for the S_IFSOCK case, since a
> > socket cannot be open anyway?

If it's a state that userspace should never be able to reach, then yes,
I think a WARN_ON_ONCE() would be nice.

> We just did some more tests (for the next patch series) and it turns out
> that may_open() can return EACCES before another part returns ENXIO.
> 
> As a reminder, the next series will deny access to block devices,
> character devices, fifo and socket when opened with O_MAYEXEC *and* if
> any policy is enforced (via the sysctl).
> 
> The question is then: do we prefer to return EACCES when a policy is
> enforced (on a socket), or do we stick to the ENXIO? The EACCES approach
> will be more consistent with devices and fifo handling, and seems safer
> (belt and suspenders) thought.

I think EACCES is correct for these cases, since it's a new flag, etc.

-- 
Kees Cook