On 30/04/2025 20:53, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 11:14:06AM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> On 25/04/2025 23:45, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> In commit bbdc6076d2e5 ("binfmt_elf: move brk out of mmap when doing
>>> direct loader exec"), the brk was moved out of the mmap region when
>>> loading static PIE binaries (ET_DYN without INTERP). The common case
>>> for these binaries was testing new ELF loaders, so the brk needed to
>>> be away from mmap to avoid colliding with stack, future mmaps (of the
>>> loader-loaded binary), etc. But this was only done when ASLR was enabled,
>>> in an attempt to minimize changes to memory layouts.
>>
>> If it's ok to move the brk to low memory for the !INTERP case, why is it not
>> ok
>> to just load the whole program in low memory? Perhaps if the thing that is
>> being
>> loaded does turn out to be the interpretter then it will move the brk to just
>> after to the program it loads so there is no conflict (I'm just guessing).
>
> The bulk of the rationale is in commit eab09532d400 ("binfmt_elf: use
> ELF_ET_DYN_BASE only for PIE"). But it mostly boils down to "try to keep
> things as far apart as possible to avoid having things collide, which
> is especially problematic on 32-bit systems". Also, since memory layouts
> also end up getting limited by userspace assumptions, as seen with commit
> c715b72c1ba4 ("mm: revert x86_64 and arm64 ELF_ET_DYN_BASE base changes"),
> it's been shown we want to change as little as possible at a time. :)
> The intent was to lower ELF_ET_DYN_BASE further, but it ended up not
> being possible on x86 nor arm64. :( So, yes, it would work for 64-bit
> archs, but not 32-bit. I've been trying to avoid region selection being
> arch-width-specific.
Ahh got it, thanks for the explanation!
>
> So, since brk is small and isolated, this has proven a viable thing to
> move (rather than the whole program), and with the default being ASLR
> enabled it's been in this position for a while now. Doing it also for
> non-ASLR should be okay too.
I agree, as long as COMPAT_BRK is not set (which is the common case IFAICT).
When COMPAT_BRK is enabled, I think you are breaking the purpose of that
Kconfig? Perhaps it's not a real-world problem though...
>
>>> After adding support to respect alignment requirements for static PIE
>>> binaries in commit 3545deff0ec7 ("binfmt_elf: Honor PT_LOAD alignment
>>> for static PIE"), it became possible to have a large gap after the
>>> final PT_LOAD segment and the top of the mmap region. This means that
>>> future mmap allocations might go after the last PT_LOAD segment (where
>>> brk might be if ASLR was disabled) instead of before them (where they
>>> traditionally ended up).
>>>
>>> On arm64, running with ASLR disabled, Ubuntu 22.04's "ldconfig" binary,
>>> a static PIE, has alignment requirements that leaves a gap large enough
>>> after the last PT_LOAD segment to fit the vdso and vvar, but still leave
>>> enough space for the brk (which immediately follows the last PT_LOAD
>>> segment) to be allocated by the binary.
>>>
>>> fffff7f20000-fffff7fde000 r-xp 00000000 fe:02 8110426
>>> /home/ubuntu/glibc-2.35/build/elf/ldconfig
>>> fffff7fee000-fffff7ff5000 rw-p 000be000 fe:02 8110426
>>> /home/ubuntu/glibc-2.35/build/elf/ldconfig
>>
>> nit: I captured this with a locally built version that has debug symbols,
>> hence
>> the weird "/home/ubuntu/glibc-2.35/build/elf/ldconfig" path. Perhaps it is
>> clearer to change this to "/sbin/ldconfig.real", which is the system
>> installed
>> location?
>
> Sure; I can update the example.
>
>>
>>> fffff7ff5000-fffff7ffa000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0
>>> ***[brk will go here at fffff7ffa000]***
>>> fffff7ffc000-fffff7ffe000 r--p 00000000 00:00 0 [vvar]
>>> fffff7ffe000-fffff8000000 r-xp 00000000 00:00 0 [vdso]
>>> fffffffdf000-1000000000000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0 [stack]
>>>
>>> After commit 0b3bc3354eb9 ("arm64: vdso: Switch to generic storage
>>> implementation"), the arm64 vvar grew slightly, and suddenly the brk
>>> collided with the allocation.
>>>
>>> fffff7f20000-fffff7fde000 r-xp 00000000 fe:02 8110426
>>> /home/ubuntu/glibc-2.35/build/elf/ldconfig
>>> fffff7fee000-fffff7ff5000 rw-p 000be000 fe:02 8110426
>>> /home/ubuntu/glibc-2.35/build/elf/ldconfig
>>> fffff7ff5000-fffff7ffa000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0
>>> ***[oops, no room any more, vvar is at fffff7ffa000!]***
>>> fffff7ffa000-fffff7ffe000 r--p 00000000 00:00 0 [vvar]
>>> fffff7ffe000-fffff8000000 r-xp 00000000 00:00 0 [vdso]
>>> fffffffdf000-1000000000000 rw-p 00000000 00:00 0 [stack]
>>>
>>> The solution is to unconditionally move the brk out of the mmap region
>>> for static PIE binaries. Whether ASLR is enabled or not does not change if
>>> there may be future mmap allocation collisions with a growing brk region.
>>>
>>> Update memory layout comments (with kernel-doc headings), consolidate
>>> the setting of mm->brk to later (it isn't needed early), move static PIE
>>> brk out of mmap unconditionally, and make sure brk(2) knows to base brk
>>> position off of mm->start_brk not mm->end_data no matter what the cause of
>>> moving it is (via current->brk_randomized). (Though why isn't this always
>>> just start_brk? More research is needed, but leave that alone for now.)
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Ryan Roberts <[email protected]>
>>> Closes:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
>>> Fixes: bbdc6076d2e5 ("binfmt_elf: move brk out of mmap when doing direct
>>> loader exec")
>>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Al Viro <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Christian Brauner <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> fs/binfmt_elf.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>>> 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/binfmt_elf.c b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
>>> index 584fa89bc877..26c87d076adb 100644
>>> --- a/fs/binfmt_elf.c
>>> +++ b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
>>> @@ -830,6 +830,7 @@ static int load_elf_binary(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
>>> struct elf_phdr *elf_ppnt, *elf_phdata, *interp_elf_phdata = NULL;
>>> struct elf_phdr *elf_property_phdata = NULL;
>>> unsigned long elf_brk;
>>> + bool brk_moved = false;
>>> int retval, i;
>>> unsigned long elf_entry;
>>> unsigned long e_entry;
>>> @@ -1097,15 +1098,19 @@ static int load_elf_binary(struct linux_binprm
>>> *bprm)
>>> /* Calculate any requested alignment. */
>>> alignment = maximum_alignment(elf_phdata,
>>> elf_ex->e_phnum);
>>>
>>> - /*
>>> - * There are effectively two types of ET_DYN
>>> - * binaries: programs (i.e. PIE: ET_DYN with PT_INTERP)
>>> - * and loaders (ET_DYN without PT_INTERP, since they
>>> - * _are_ the ELF interpreter). The loaders must
>>> - * be loaded away from programs since the program
>>> - * may otherwise collide with the loader (especially
>>> - * for ET_EXEC which does not have a randomized
>>> - * position). For example to handle invocations of
>>> + /**
>>> + * DOC: PIE handling
>>> + *
>>> + * There are effectively two types of ET_DYN ELF
>>> + * binaries: programs (i.e. PIE: ET_DYN with
>>> + * PT_INTERP) and loaders (i.e. static PIE: ET_DYN
>>> + * without PT_INTERP, usually the ELF interpreter
>>> + * itself). Loaders must be loaded away from programs
>>> + * since the program may otherwise collide with the
>>> + * loader (especially for ET_EXEC which does not have
>>> + * a randomized position).
>>> + *
>>> + * For example, to handle invocations of
>>> * "./ld.so someprog" to test out a new version of
>>> * the loader, the subsequent program that the
>>> * loader loads must avoid the loader itself, so
>>> @@ -1118,6 +1123,9 @@ static int load_elf_binary(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
>>> * ELF_ET_DYN_BASE and loaders are loaded into the
>>> * independently randomized mmap region (0 load_bias
>>> * without MAP_FIXED nor MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE).
>>> + *
>>> + * See below for "brk" handling details, which is
>>> + * also affected by program vs loader and ASLR.
>>> */
>>> if (interpreter) {
>>> /* On ET_DYN with PT_INTERP, we do the ASLR. */
>>> @@ -1234,8 +1242,6 @@ static int load_elf_binary(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
>>> start_data += load_bias;
>>> end_data += load_bias;
>>>
>>> - current->mm->start_brk = current->mm->brk = ELF_PAGEALIGN(elf_brk);
>>> -
>>> if (interpreter) {
>>> elf_entry = load_elf_interp(interp_elf_ex,
>>> interpreter,
>>> @@ -1291,27 +1297,40 @@ static int load_elf_binary(struct linux_binprm
>>> *bprm)
>>> mm->end_data = end_data;
>>> mm->start_stack = bprm->p;
>>>
>>> - if ((current->flags & PF_RANDOMIZE) && (snapshot_randomize_va_space >
>>> 1)) {
>>> + /**
>>> + * DOC: "brk" handling
>>> + *
>>> + * For architectures with ELF randomization, when executing a
>>> + * loader directly (i.e. static PIE: ET_DYN without PT_INTERP),
>>> + * move the brk area out of the mmap region and into the unused
>>> + * ELF_ET_DYN_BASE region. Since "brk" grows up it may collide
>>> + * early with the stack growing down or other regions being put
>>> + * into the mmap region by the kernel (e.g. vdso).
>>> + */
>>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE) &&
>>
>> Does this imply that this issue will persist for
>> !CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE
>> arches?
>
> Ah, hm, interesting point. I think those architectures are unlikely to
> have static PIE binaries, though? ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE is currently
> selected (some through ARCH_WANT_DEFAULT_TOPDOWN_MMAP_LAYOUT) for these
> architectures:
>
> arm
> arm64
> csky
> loongarch
> mips
> parisc
> powerpc
> riscv
> s390
> x86
>
> In the interest of changing as little as possible, I think I'd like to
> stick with this being gated by CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE, since
> those architectures, in theory, would be expecting brk to be moved, and
> the others may not.
OK makes sense.
>
>>
>>> + elf_ex->e_type == ET_DYN && !interpreter) {
>>> + elf_brk = ELF_ET_DYN_BASE;
>>> + /* This counts as moving the brk, so let brk(2) know. */
>>> + brk_moved = true;
>>
>> So you are now randomizing the brk regardless of the value of
>> snapshot_randomize_va_space. I suggested this as a potential solution but was
>> concerned about back-compat issues. See this code snippet from memory.c:
>
> Well, the "randomize" is only happening if snapshot_randomize_va_space
> is >1, but we are _moving_ the brk in this case, which is what the
> brk(2) syscall wants to know about, and is what CONFIG_COMPAT_BRK tries
> to deal with. So yes, there is a bit of a conflict. More below...
>
>>
>> ----8<----
>> /*
>> * Randomize the address space (stacks, mmaps, brk, etc.).
>> *
>> * ( When CONFIG_COMPAT_BRK=y we exclude brk from randomization,
>> * as ancient (libc5 based) binaries can segfault. )
>> */
>> int randomize_va_space __read_mostly =
>> #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT_BRK
>> 1;
>> #else
>> 2;
>> #endif
>> ----8<----
>>
>> This implies to me that this change is in danger of breaking libc5-based
>> binaries?
>
> It's possible it could break running the loader directly against some
> libc5-based binaries. If this turns out to be a real-world issue, we can
> find a better solution (perhaps pre-allocating a large brk).
But how large is large enough...
Perhaps it is safer to only move the brk if !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_COMPAT_BRK) ?
Then wait to see if there are any real-world COMPAT_BRK users that hit the
issue?
Thanks,
Ryan
>
> -Kees
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ryan
>>
>>> + }
>>> + mm->start_brk = mm->brk = ELF_PAGEALIGN(elf_brk);
>>> +
>>> + if ((current->flags & PF_RANDOMIZE) && snapshot_randomize_va_space > 1)
>>> {
>>> /*
>>> - * For architectures with ELF randomization, when executing
>>> - * a loader directly (i.e. no interpreter listed in ELF
>>> - * headers), move the brk area out of the mmap region
>>> - * (since it grows up, and may collide early with the stack
>>> - * growing down), and into the unused ELF_ET_DYN_BASE region.
>>> + * If we didn't move the brk to ELF_ET_DYN_BASE (above),
>>> + * leave a gap between .bss and brk.
>>> */
>>> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_ELF_RANDOMIZE) &&
>>> - elf_ex->e_type == ET_DYN && !interpreter) {
>>> - mm->brk = mm->start_brk = ELF_ET_DYN_BASE;
>>> - } else {
>>> - /* Otherwise leave a gap between .bss and brk. */
>>> + if (!brk_moved)
>>> mm->brk = mm->start_brk = mm->brk + PAGE_SIZE;
>>> - }
>>>
>>> mm->brk = mm->start_brk = arch_randomize_brk(mm);
>>> + brk_moved = true;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> #ifdef compat_brk_randomized
>>> + if (brk_moved)
>>> current->brk_randomized = 1;
>>> #endif
>>> - }
>>>
>>> if (current->personality & MMAP_PAGE_ZERO) {
>>> /* Why this, you ask??? Well SVr4 maps page 0 as read-only,
>>
>
