From: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
"Ulrich Weigand <ulrich.weigand@de.ibm.com>Oleg Nesterov"
<oleg@tv-sign.ru>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: [PATCH] tracehook: exec double-reporting fix
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 20:04:23 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081210040423.5EE72FC362@magilla.sf.frob.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Arnd Bergmann's message of Tuesday, 9 December 2008 15:33:09 +0100 <200812091533.10628.arnd@arndb.de>
The following changes since commit 437f2f91d6597c67662f847d9ed4c99cb3c440cd:
Linus Torvalds (1):
Merge master.kernel.org:/home/rmk/linux-2.6-arm
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/frob/linux-2.6-roland.git to-linus
Roland McGrath (1):
tracehook: exec double-reporting fix
fs/exec.c | 10 +++++++++-
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Thanks,
Roland
---
[PATCH] tracehook: exec double-reporting fix
The patch 6341c39 "tracehook: exec" introduced a small regression in
2.6.27 regarding binfmt_misc exec event reporting. Since the reporting
is now done in the common search_binary_handler() function, an exec
of a misc binary will result in two (or possibly multiple) exec events
being reported, instead of just a single one, because the misc handler
contains a recursive call to search_binary_handler.
To add to the confusion, if PTRACE_O_TRACEEXEC is not active, the multiple
SIGTRAP signals will in fact cause only a single ptrace intercept, as the
signals are not queued. However, if PTRACE_O_TRACEEXEC is on, the debugger
will actually see multiple ptrace intercepts (PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC).
The test program included below demonstrates the problem.
This change fixes the bug by calling tracehook_report_exec() only in the
outermost search_binary_handler() call (bprm->recursion_depth == 0).
The additional change to restore bprm->recursion_depth after each binfmt
load_binary call is actually superfluous for this bug, since we test the
value saved on entry to search_binary_handler(). But it keeps the use of
of the depth count to its most obvious expected meaning. Depending on what
binfmt handlers do in certain cases, there could have been false-positive
tests for recursion limits before this change.
/* Test program using PTRACE_O_TRACEEXEC.
This forks and exec's the first argument with the rest of the arguments,
while ptrace'ing. It expects to see one PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC stop and
then a successful exit, with no other signals or events in between.
Test for kernel doing two PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC stops for a binfmt_misc exec:
$ gcc -g traceexec.c -o traceexec
$ sudo sh -c 'echo :test:M::foobar::/bin/cat: > /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc/register'
$ echo 'foobar test' > ./foobar
$ chmod +x ./foobar
$ ./traceexec ./foobar; echo $?
==> good <==
foobar test
0
$
==> bad <==
foobar test
unexpected status 0x4057f != 0
3
$
*/
#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
#include <sys/ptrace.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
static void
wait_for (pid_t child, int expect)
{
int status;
pid_t p = wait (&status);
if (p != child)
{
perror ("wait");
exit (2);
}
if (status != expect)
{
fprintf (stderr, "unexpected status %#x != %#x\n", status, expect);
exit (3);
}
}
int
main (int argc, char **argv)
{
pid_t child = fork ();
if (child < 0)
{
perror ("fork");
return 127;
}
else if (child == 0)
{
ptrace (PTRACE_TRACEME);
raise (SIGUSR1);
execv (argv[1], &argv[1]);
perror ("execve");
_exit (127);
}
wait_for (child, W_STOPCODE (SIGUSR1));
if (ptrace (PTRACE_SETOPTIONS, child,
0L, (void *) (long) PTRACE_O_TRACEEXEC) != 0)
{
perror ("PTRACE_SETOPTIONS");
return 4;
}
if (ptrace (PTRACE_CONT, child, 0L, 0L) != 0)
{
perror ("PTRACE_CONT");
return 5;
}
wait_for (child, W_STOPCODE (SIGTRAP | (PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC << 8)));
if (ptrace (PTRACE_CONT, child, 0L, 0L) != 0)
{
perror ("PTRACE_CONT");
return 6;
}
wait_for (child, W_EXITCODE (0, 0));
return 0;
}
Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
CC: Ulrich Weigand <ulrich.weigand@de.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
---
fs/exec.c | 10 +++++++++-
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
index 4e834f1..ec5df9a 100644
--- a/fs/exec.c
+++ b/fs/exec.c
@@ -1159,6 +1159,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(remove_arg_zero);
*/
int search_binary_handler(struct linux_binprm *bprm,struct pt_regs *regs)
{
+ unsigned int depth = bprm->recursion_depth;
int try,retval;
struct linux_binfmt *fmt;
#ifdef __alpha__
@@ -1219,8 +1220,15 @@ int search_binary_handler(struct linux_binprm *bprm,struct pt_regs *regs)
continue;
read_unlock(&binfmt_lock);
retval = fn(bprm, regs);
+ /*
+ * Restore the depth counter to its starting value
+ * in this call, so we don't have to rely on every
+ * load_binary function to restore it on return.
+ */
+ bprm->recursion_depth = depth;
if (retval >= 0) {
- tracehook_report_exec(fmt, bprm, regs);
+ if (depth == 0)
+ tracehook_report_exec(fmt, bprm, regs);
put_binfmt(fmt);
allow_write_access(bprm->file);
if (bprm->file)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-10 21:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-09 14:33 [PATCH, RFC] revert breakage from "tracehook: exec" Arnd Bergmann
2008-12-10 4:04 ` Roland McGrath
2008-12-11 21:42 ` Ulrich Weigand
2008-12-10 4:04 ` Roland McGrath [this message]
2008-12-11 13:29 ` [PATCH] tracehook: exec double-reporting fix Arnd Bergmann
2008-12-11 16:44 ` [stable] " Greg KH
2008-12-11 17:59 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20081210040423.5EE72FC362@magilla.sf.frob.com \
--to=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=stable@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome