While the defense-in-depth RLIMIT_STACK limit on setuid processes was
protected against races from other threads calling setrlimit(), I missed
protecting it against races from external processes calling prlimit().
This adds locking around the change and makes sure that rlim_max is set
too.

Reported-by: Ben Hutchings <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Brad Spengler <[email protected]>
Fixes: 64701dee4178e ("exec: Use sane stack rlimit under secureexec")
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: James Morris <[email protected]>
Cc: Serge Hallyn <[email protected]>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <[email protected]>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
---
 fs/exec.c | 7 ++++++-
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
index 1d6243d9f2b6..6be2aa0ab26f 100644
--- a/fs/exec.c
+++ b/fs/exec.c
@@ -1340,10 +1340,15 @@ void setup_new_exec(struct linux_binprm * bprm)
                 * avoid bad behavior from the prior rlimits. This has to
                 * happen before arch_pick_mmap_layout(), which examines
                 * RLIMIT_STACK, but after the point of no return to avoid
-                * needing to clean up the change on failure.
+                * races from other threads changing the limits. This also
+                * must be protected from races with prlimit() calls.
                 */
+               task_lock(current->group_leader);
                if (current->signal->rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_cur > _STK_LIM)
                        current->signal->rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_cur = _STK_LIM;
+               if (current->signal->rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_max > _STK_LIM)
+                       current->signal->rlim[RLIMIT_STACK].rlim_max = _STK_LIM;
+               task_unlock(current->group_leader);
        }
 
        arch_pick_mmap_layout(current->mm);
-- 
2.7.4


-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security

Reply via email to