mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Nickolai Zeldovich <nickolai@csail.mit.edu>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
	 Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,  Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	 Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander@mihalicyn.com>,
	 Luca Boccassi <luca.boccassi@gmail.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,  linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] pidfs: do not report fields that do not fit into the caller's struct
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2026 12:42:51 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261021-trauen-wirft-hegen-847ed3b60f61@brauner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261017020634.792390-1-nickolai@csail.mit.edu>

> The documentation of struct pidfd_info promises that "If the structure
> size is too small to contain a field (requested or not), to avoid
> confusion the mask will not contain a bit for that field", and asks
> userspace to trust the returned mask when deciding which fields hold
> valid data.
> 
> pidfd_info() does not keep that promise. It builds kinfo.mask without
> looking at the size encoded in the ioctl command, and
> copy_struct_to_user() then truncates the copy to that size. A caller
> that passes a 64-byte struct (PIDFD_INFO_SIZE_VER0) and requests
> PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP or PIDFD_INFO_SUPPORTED_MASK gets a mask with
> PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP, PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP_SIGNAL, PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP_CODE
> and PIDFD_INFO_SUPPORTED_MASK set, while the coredump_* and
> supported_mask fields behind the 64 bytes were never written. Trusting
> the mask as documented, userspace then reads whatever its own buffer
> held at those offsets. The same happens for a 72- or 80-byte struct
> and the fields added after it.
> 
> Clear the bits of the fields that lie beyond the caller's size before
> the copy, in the one place that knows both the final mask and the size.
> A request for a field that cannot be returned is thereby answered the
> way the header describes: the field is simply absent from the mask.
> 
> The added selftest issues PIDFD_GET_INFO with the first published size
> over a full-size, poisoned struct and checks that the mask names none
> of the fields beyond that size and that the poison is intact. It fails
> on an unpatched kernel and passes with this change.
> 
> Found by formal verification of fs/pidfs.c against the kernel binary.
> 
> Fixes: 1d8db6fd698d ("pidfs, coredump: add PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP")
> Signed-off-by: Nickolai Zeldovich <nickolai@csail.mit.edu>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Amutable) <brauner@kernel.org>
> ---
> Notes:
>     The three size thresholds follow the field layout: coredump_mask and
>     coredump_signal end at PIDFD_INFO_SIZE_VER1 (72), coredump_code at
>     PIDFD_INFO_SIZE_VER2 (80), supported_mask at PIDFD_INFO_SIZE_VER3 (88).
>     Masking the request bits early instead (before the coredump and
>     supported_mask blocks run) would save a little work for such callers
>     but leaves the bits set in the task->mm fallback path; clearing the
>     result once before copy_struct_to_user() covers every way a bit can be
>     set. No stable tag: the only callers affected pass a struct size
>     smaller than the fields they request, and the consequence is a wrong
>     mask bit, not a crash or corruption.
> 
>  fs/pidfs.c                                    |  8 ++++
>  tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd.h         | 16 +++++++
>  .../testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_info_test.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++

Semantic changes and selftest changes in separate patches, please.

-- 


  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-21 10:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-17  2:06 Nickolai Zeldovich
2026-10-21 10:42 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2026-10-24  4:13 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] " Nickolai Zeldovich
2026-10-24  4:13   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " Nickolai Zeldovich
2026-10-24  9:06     ` Luca Boccassi
2026-10-24  4:13   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] selftests/pidfd: test that fields beyond the struct size are not reported Nickolai Zeldovich

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=20261021-trauen-wirft-hegen-847ed3b60f61@brauner \
    --to=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander@mihalicyn.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luca.boccassi@gmail.com \
    --cc=nickolai@csail.mit.edu \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®