|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

The x86_64 DOS hole

Benefits for LWN subscribers

The primary benefit from subscribing to LWN is helping to keep us publishing, but, beyond that, subscribers get immediate access to all site content and access to a number of extra site features. Please sign up today!

By Jonathan Corbet
February 2, 2010
As of this writing, there have not yet been any distributor updates for the vulnerability which will become known as CVE-2010-0307. This particular bug does not (as far as your editor knows) allow a complete takeover of a system, but it can be used for denial-of-service attacks, or in a situation where an attacker with unprivileged local access wishes to force a reboot. It is also an illustration of the hazards which come with old and tricky code.

Mathias Krause reported the problem at the end of January. It seems that, on an x86_64 system, a kernel panic can be forced by trying (and failing) to exec() a 64-bit program while running in 32-bit mode, then triggering a core dump. There does not seem to be a way to exploit this bug to run arbitrary code - but those who would take over systems have shown enough creativity in situations like this that one can never be sure. Even without that, though, the ability to take any 64-bit x86 system down is not a good thing. Current kernels are affected, as are older ones; your editor is not aware of anybody having taken the time to determine when the problem first appeared, but Mathias has shown that 2.6.26 kernels contained the bug.

The execve() system call is the means by which a process stops running one program and starts running a new one. It must clean up most (but not all) of the state associated with the old program, resetting things for the new one. In this process, there is a "point of no return": the place where the system call is committed to making the change and can no longer back out. Before this point, any sort of failure should lead to an error return from the system call (which otherwise is not expected to return at all); afterward, the only recourse is to kill the process outright.

Sometime after the point of no return, execve() must adjust the "personality" of the process to match the new executable image. For example, a 64-bit process switching to a 32-bit image must go into the 32-bit personality. In the past, personalities have also been used to emulate other operating environments - running SYSV binaries, for example. The personality changes a number of aspects of the environment the program runs in, though, as we'll see, fewer than it once did.

In the past, personality changes have included filesystem namespace changes. That was necessary because the process of starting the new executable could require looking up other images, such as an "interpreter" image to run the new program. The lookup clearly had to happen prior to the point of no return; if the lookup fails then the system call should fail. So some aspects of the new image's environment had to be present while the process was still running in the context of the old image.

The solution, at the time, was to put some brutal hacks into the low-level SET_PERSONALITY() macro. This macro's job is to switch the process to a new personality, but, post-hack, it no longer did that. Instead, it would make the namespace changes, but leave most of the environment unchanged, setting the special TIF_ABI_PENDING task flag to remind the kernel that, at a later point, it needed to complete the personality change. Over time, the namespace changes were removed from the kernel, but this two-step personality switch mechanism remained.

This hackery allowed SET_PERSONALITY() to be called before the point of no return without breaking the process of tearing down the old image. What was missing, though, was any mechanism for fully restoring the old personality should things change after the SET_PERSONALITY() call. In effect, that call became the real point of no return, since the kernel had no way of going back to how things were before.

There aren't too many ways that execve() could fail in the window between the SET_PERSONALITY() call and the official point of no return. But one is all it takes, and one easily accessible failure mode is an inability to find the "interpreter" for the new image. The interpreter need not be an executable; it's really the execution environment as a whole. As it happens, there's no means by which a 32-bit process can run a 64-bit image; trying to do so leads to a failure in just the wrong part of the execve() call. Control will return to the calling program, but with a partially-corrupted personality setup.

As it happens, the most common response to an execve() failure is to inform the user and exit; the calling program wasn't expecting to be running any more, so it will normally just bail out. So the schizophrenic personality it's running under will likely never be noticed. But if the calling program instead takes a signal which forces a core dump, the confused personality information will lead to an equally confused kernel and a panic.

In summary, what we have here is a combination of tricky code, made worse by inter-architecture compatibility concerns, implementing behavior which is no longer needed - and doing it wrong. For added fun, it's worth noting that this problem was reported in December, but it fell through the cracks and remained unfixed.

The initial solution proposed by Linus was to simply remove the early SET_PERSONALITY() call. After a bit of discussion, though, Linus and H. Peter Anvin concluded that it was better to fix the code for real. The result was a pair of patches, the first of which splits flush_old_exec() (which contained the point of no return deeply within) into two functions meant to run before and after that point. This patch also gets rid of the early SET_PERSONALITY() call. The second patch then eliminates the TIF_ABI_PENDING hack, simply doing the full personality change at the point of no return.

These changes were merged just prior to the release of 2.6.33-rc6. This is a fairly significant pair of patches to put into the core kernel at this late stage in the 2.6.33 development cycle. And, indeed, they have caused some problems, especially with non-x86 architectures. Distributors looking to backport this fix into older kernels may well find themselves looking for a way to simplify it. But security fixes are important, and fixes which get rid of cobweb-encrusted code which could be hiding other problems are even better. The remaining problems should be cleaned up in short order, and the 2.6.33 kernel will be better for it.

Index entries for this article
Kernel Security/Vulnerabilities
Security Linux kernel


The LWN site is currently under high scraper load, so comment display has been suppressed for anonymous users. If you are a human, you may read the comments by clicking the button below:

Note: you can avoid this step in the future by logging into your LWN account.


Copyright © 2010, Eklektix, Inc.
This article may be redistributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY-SA 4.0 license
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /