Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220808073232.8808-1-david@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220808073232.8808-1-david@redhat.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Tue, 9 Aug 2022 11:48:25 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiKm3QjM1_XwWNW8P8drW6s0ZeANm7VKy_1c7WH6RSp3g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mm/gup: fix FOLL_FORCE COW security issue and remove FOLL_COW
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 12:32 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> For example, a write() via /proc/self/mem to a uffd-wp-protected range has
> to fail instead of silently granting write access and bypassing the
> userspace fault handler.

This, btw, just makes me go "uffd-wp is broken garbage" once more.

It also makes me go "if uffd-wp can disallow ptrace writes, then why
doesn't regular write protect do it"?

IOW, I don't think the patch is wrong (apart from the VM_BUG_ON's that
absolutely must go away), but I get the strong feelign that we instead
should try to get rid of FOLL_FORCE entirely.

If some other user action can stop FOLL_FORCE anyway, then why do we
support it at all?

             Linus