Re: [PATCH v3 01/15] binfmt: Introduce secureexec flag
From: Andy Lutomirski
Date: Tue Jul 18 2017 - 21:01:53 EST
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> To begin this refactoring, this adds the secureexec flag to the bprm
> struct, which will eventually be used in place of the LSM hook.
I'm very confused. See below. Maybe a later patch will unconfuse me.
>
> Cc: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/binfmt_elf.c | 3 ++-
> fs/binfmt_elf_fdpic.c | 3 ++-
> include/linux/binfmts.h | 8 +++++++-
> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/binfmt_elf.c b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> index 5075fd5c62c8..991e4de3515f 100644
> --- a/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> +++ b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
> @@ -254,7 +254,8 @@ create_elf_tables(struct linux_binprm *bprm, struct elfhdr *exec,
> NEW_AUX_ENT(AT_EUID, from_kuid_munged(cred->user_ns, cred->euid));
> NEW_AUX_ENT(AT_GID, from_kgid_munged(cred->user_ns, cred->gid));
> NEW_AUX_ENT(AT_EGID, from_kgid_munged(cred->user_ns, cred->egid));
> - NEW_AUX_ENT(AT_SECURE, security_bprm_secureexec(bprm));
> + bprm->secureexec |= security_bprm_secureexec(bprm);
> + NEW_AUX_ENT(AT_SECURE, bprm->secureexec);
This is ->load_binary ...
> diff --git a/include/linux/binfmts.h b/include/linux/binfmts.h
> index 05488da3aee9..9508b5f83c7e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/binfmts.h
> +++ b/include/linux/binfmts.h
> @@ -27,9 +27,15 @@ struct linux_binprm {
> unsigned int
> cred_prepared:1,/* true if creds already prepared (multiple
> * preps happen for interpreters) */
> - cap_effective:1;/* true if has elevated effective capabilities,
> + cap_effective:1,/* true if has elevated effective capabilities,
> * false if not; except for init which inherits
> * its parent's caps anyway */
> + /*
> + * Set by bprm_set_creds hook to indicate a privilege-gaining
> + * exec has happened. Used to sanitize execution environment
> + * and to set AT_SECURE auxv for glibc.
> + */
... which is not bprm_set_creds().
What am I missing here?