Re: /proc/[pid]/mem write implications

[Alan Cox]

> > But I think that allowing arbitrary processes to write to **their own**
> > memory via a file descriptor might in itself be problematic. Please,
> > help me understand how this is safe.
> 
> You will have a sysctl to control if it is writable.

The problem is not that the check is done in write, the problem is more
fundamental - the open should bind to the memory of the executable image
currently running, instead it effectively late binds each write to the
image now being run. That is the root cause.

What's sad about this is that people went and re-introduced the bug and
clearly didn't think to spend 2 minutes asking Google why the checks were
there originally.

2006 thread

http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0605.2/1359.html

2004 thread

http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0407.0/1169.html

2002 thread

http://www.eros-os.org/pipermail/cap-talk/2002-May/000922.html


If you really want to fix this then you need to bind /proc/self/mem to
the executable image in question, and you need to effectively revoke()
that on exec so it can't be used to pin old images into memory.

Fix that and the rest falls out in the wash.

Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/