BUG: the kernel does not initialize audit before forking PID 1 #66
Assignees
Labels
Comments
|
Quick note: calling audit_init() from start_kernel() means we will need to split the kauditd_thread creation into a separate init function that we call from the normal initcall mechanism. |
|
Another update: it looks like we want to keep most of audit_init() in the code called via the normal initcall mechanism (although maybe use subsys_initcall), and simply set audit_enabled and audit_ever_enabled in the new early init. |
|
It looks like I have a preliminary patch which boots, solves the problem, and doesn't appear to break anything at first glance. Let me play around with it a bit more and I'll post it. In case anyone is wondering, this isn't likely to go into audit/next before the upcoming merge window. |
|
After looking at the patch a bit more, I decided to just move the logic into audit_enable(...) (as it only matters if I'm also playing with a few other patches to go into the patchset which would clean up some variable types, the strtol usage, and move audit_init(...) earlier in the initcall process. |
|
Upstream RFC patchset posting is linked below. It's a five patch set, but strictly speaking only patch 1/5 is necessary to fix the problem, the other four patches just make things less sucky. |
|
I know this was working properly at some point. This patch 1/5 restores previous behaviour and that this wasn't all useless code after all that was removed in this previous commit in v3.14-rc1 (2014-02-02): |
This was referenced Oct 4, 2017
|
FYI, the RFC patchset mentioned above is now in audit/next and should go up to Linus during the next merge window. |
pcmoore
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 2, 2020
After previous fix for zero extension test_verifier tests #65 and #66 now fail. Before the fix we can see the alu32 mov op at insn 10 10: R0_w=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=8,vs=8,imm=0) R1_w=invP(id=0, smin_value=4294967168,smax_value=4294967423, umin_value=4294967168,umax_value=4294967423, var_off=(0x0; 0x1ffffffff), s32_min_value=-2147483648,s32_max_value=2147483647, u32_min_value=0,u32_max_value=-1) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm 10: (bc) w1 = w1 11: R0_w=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=8,vs=8,imm=0) R1_w=invP(id=0, smin_value=0,smax_value=2147483647, umin_value=0,umax_value=4294967295, var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff), s32_min_value=-2147483648,s32_max_value=2147483647, u32_min_value=0,u32_max_value=-1) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm After the fix at insn 10 because we have 's32_min_value < 0' the following step 11 now has 'smax_value=U32_MAX' where before we pulled the s32_max_value bound into the smax_value as seen above in 11 with smax_value=2147483647. 10: R0_w=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=8,vs=8,imm=0) R1_w=inv(id=0, smin_value=4294967168,smax_value=4294967423, umin_value=4294967168,umax_value=4294967423, var_off=(0x0; 0x1ffffffff), s32_min_value=-2147483648, s32_max_value=2147483647, u32_min_value=0,u32_max_value=-1) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm 10: (bc) w1 = w1 11: R0_w=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=8,vs=8,imm=0) R1_w=inv(id=0, smin_value=0,smax_value=4294967295, umin_value=0,umax_value=4294967295, var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff), s32_min_value=-2147483648, s32_max_value=2147483647, u32_min_value=0, u32_max_value=-1) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm The fall out of this is by the time we get to the failing instruction at step 14 where previously we had the following: 14: R0_w=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=8,vs=8,imm=0) R1_w=inv(id=0, smin_value=72057594021150720,smax_value=72057594029539328, umin_value=72057594021150720,umax_value=72057594029539328, var_off=(0xffffffff000000; 0xffffff), s32_min_value=-16777216,s32_max_value=-1, u32_min_value=-16777216,u32_max_value=-1) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm 14: (0f) r0 += r1 We now have, 14: R0_w=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=8,vs=8,imm=0) R1_w=inv(id=0, smin_value=0,smax_value=72057594037927935, umin_value=0,umax_value=72057594037927935, var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffffffffff), s32_min_value=-2147483648,s32_max_value=2147483647, u32_min_value=0,u32_max_value=-1) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm 14: (0f) r0 += r1 In the original step 14 'smin_value=72057594021150720' this trips the logic in the verifier function check_reg_sane_offset(), if (smin >= BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF || smin <= -BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF) { verbose(env, "value %lld makes %s pointer be out of bounds\n", smin, reg_type_str[type]); return false; } Specifically, the 'smin <= -BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF' check. But with the fix at step 14 we have bounds 'smin_value=0' so the above check is not tripped because BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF=1<<29. We have a smin_value=0 here because at step 10 the smaller smin_value=0 means the subtractions at steps 11 and 12 bring the smin_value negative. 11: (17) r1 -= 2147483584 12: (17) r1 -= 2147483584 13: (77) r1 >>= 8 Then the shift clears the top bit and smin_value is set to 0. Note we still have the smax_value in the fixed code so any reads will fail. An alternative would be to have reg_sane_check() do both smin and smax value tests. To fix the test we can omit the 'r1 >>=8' at line 13. This will change the err string, but keeps the intention of the test as suggseted by the title, "check after truncation of boundary-crossing range". If the verifier logic changes a different value is likely to be thrown in the error or the error will no longer be thrown forcing this test to be examined. With this change we see the new state at step 13. 13: R0_w=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=8,vs=8,imm=0) R1_w=invP(id=0, smin_value=-4294967168,smax_value=127, umin_value=0,umax_value=18446744073709551615, s32_min_value=-2147483648,s32_max_value=2147483647, u32_min_value=0,u32_max_value=-1) R10=fp0 fp-8_w=mmmmmmmm Giving the expected out of bounds error, "value -4294967168 makes map_value pointer be out of bounds" However, for unpriv case we see a different error now because of the mixed signed bounds pointer arithmatic. This seems OK so I've only added the unpriv_errstr for this. Another optino may have been to do addition on r1 instead of subtraction but I favor the approach above slightly. Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/159077333942.6014.14004320043595756079.stgit@john-Precision-5820-Tower
pcmoore
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 10, 2023
The initial memblock metadata is accessed from kernel image mapping. The regions arrays need to "reallocated" from memblock and accessed through linear mapping to cover more memblock regions. So the resizing should not be allowed until linear mapping is ready. Note that there are memblock allocations when building linear mapping. This patch is similar to 24cc61d ("arm64: memblock: don't permit memblock resizing until linear mapping is up"). In following log, many memblock regions are reserved before create_linear_mapping_page_table(). And then it triggered reallocation of memblock.reserved.regions and memcpy the old array in kernel image mapping to the new array in linear mapping which caused a page fault. [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf01f000-0x00000000bf01ffff] early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x28c/0x2c6 [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf021000-0x00000000bf021fff] early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x28c/0x2c6 [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf023000-0x00000000bf023fff] early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x28c/0x2c6 [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf025000-0x00000000bf025fff] early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x28c/0x2c6 [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf027000-0x00000000bf027fff] early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x28c/0x2c6 [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf029000-0x00000000bf029fff] early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x28c/0x2c6 [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf02b000-0x00000000bf02bfff] early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x28c/0x2c6 [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf02d000-0x00000000bf02dfff] early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x28c/0x2c6 [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf02f000-0x00000000bf02ffff] early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x28c/0x2c6 [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf030000-0x00000000bf030fff] early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem+0x28c/0x2c6 [ 0.000000] OF: reserved mem: 0x0000000080000000..0x000000008007ffff (512 KiB) map non-reusable mmode_resv0@80000000 [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x00000000bf000000-0x00000000bf001fed] paging_init+0x19a/0x5ae [ 0.000000] memblock_phys_alloc_range: 4096 bytes align=0x1000 from=0x0000000000000000 max_addr=0x0000000000000000 alloc_pmd_fixmap+0x14/0x1c [ 0.000000] memblock_reserve: [0x000000017ffff000-0x000000017fffffff] memblock_alloc_range_nid+0xb8/0x128 [ 0.000000] memblock: reserved is doubled to 256 at [0x000000017fffd000-0x000000017fffe7ff] [ 0.000000] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ff600000ffffd000 [ 0.000000] Oops [#1] [ 0.000000] Modules linked in: [ 0.000000] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not tainted 6.4.0-rc1-00011-g99a670b2069c #66 [ 0.000000] Hardware name: riscv-virtio,qemu (DT) [ 0.000000] epc : __memcpy+0x60/0xf8 [ 0.000000] ra : memblock_double_array+0x192/0x248 [ 0.000000] epc : ffffffff8081d214 ra : ffffffff80a3dfc0 sp : ffffffff81403bd0 [ 0.000000] gp : ffffffff814fbb38 tp : ffffffff8140dac0 t0 : 0000000001600000 [ 0.000000] t1 : 0000000000000000 t2 : 000000008f001000 s0 : ffffffff81403c60 [ 0.000000] s1 : ffffffff80c0bc98 a0 : ff600000ffffd000 a1 : ffffffff80c0bcd8 [ 0.000000] a2 : 0000000000000c00 a3 : ffffffff80c0c8d8 a4 : 0000000080000000 [ 0.000000] a5 : 0000000000080000 a6 : 0000000000000000 a7 : 0000000080200000 [ 0.000000] s2 : ff600000ffffd000 s3 : 0000000000002000 s4 : 0000000000000c00 [ 0.000000] s5 : ffffffff80c0bc60 s6 : ffffffff80c0bcc8 s7 : 0000000000000000 [ 0.000000] s8 : ffffffff814fd0a8 s9 : 000000017fffe7ff s10: 0000000000000000 [ 0.000000] s11: 0000000000001000 t3 : 0000000000001000 t4 : 0000000000000000 [ 0.000000] t5 : 000000008f003000 t6 : ff600000ffffd000 [ 0.000000] status: 0000000200000100 badaddr: ff600000ffffd000 cause: 000000000000000f [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff8081d214>] __memcpy+0x60/0xf8 [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a3e1a2>] memblock_add_range.isra.14+0x12c/0x162 [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a3e36a>] memblock_reserve+0x6e/0x8c [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a123fc>] memblock_alloc_range_nid+0xb8/0x128 [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a1256a>] memblock_phys_alloc_range+0x5e/0x6a [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a04732>] alloc_pmd_fixmap+0x14/0x1c [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a0475a>] alloc_p4d_fixmap+0xc/0x14 [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a04a36>] create_pgd_mapping+0x98/0x17c [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a04e9e>] create_linear_mapping_range.constprop.10+0xe4/0x112 [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a05bb8>] paging_init+0x3ec/0x5ae [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a03354>] setup_arch+0xb2/0x576 [ 0.000000] [<ffffffff80a00726>] start_kernel+0x72/0x57e [ 0.000000] Code: b303 0285 b383 0305 be03 0385 be83 0405 bf03 0485 (b023) 00ef [ 0.000000] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- [ 0.000000] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! [ 0.000000] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]--- Fixes: 671f9a3 ("RISC-V: Setup initial page tables in two stages") Signed-off-by: Woody Zhang <woodylab@foxmail.com> Tested-by: Song Shuai <songshuaishuai@tinylab.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/tencent_FBB94CE615C5CCE7701CD39C15CCE0EE9706@qq.com Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The kernel needs to initialize the audit subsystem before forking init/systemd so that the audit subsystem can allocate an audit_context for the process, enabling the collection of audit data if configured (e.g.
audit=1on the kernel command line).The current audit code is initialized via the generic kernel initcall mechanism, which is eventually called after the kernel forks PID 1 (PID 1 -> kernel_init(...) -> kernel_init_freeable(...) -> do_basic_setup(...) -> do_initcalls(...)). We most likely want to add a call to audit_init(...) before key_init(...) or security_init(...) in start_kernel(...).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: