On 3/7/18 5:23 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
request_module() has its own world though too. How often in your proof of concept is request_module() called? How many times do you envision it being called?
once.
+static int run_umh(struct file *file) +{ + struct subprocess_info *sub_info = call_usermodehelper_setup_file(file); + + if (!sub_info) + return -ENOMEM; + return call_usermodehelper_exec(sub_info, UMH_WAIT_EXEC); +}run_umh() calls the program and waits. Note that while we are running a UMH we can't suspend. What if they take forever, who is hosing them down with an equivalent: schedule(); try_to_freeze(); Say they are buggy and never return, will they stall suspend, have you tried? call_usermodehelper_exec() uses helper_lock() which in turn is used for umh's accounting for number of running umh's. One of the sad obscure uses for this is to deal with suspend/resume. Refer to __usermodehelper* calls on kernel/power/process.c Note how you use UMH_WAIT_EXEC too, so this is all synchronous.
looks like you misread this code and the rest of your concerns with suspend/resume are not applicable any more. #define UMH_NO_WAIT 0 /* don't wait at all */ #define UMH_WAIT_EXEC 1 /* wait for the exec, but not the process */ #define UMH_WAIT_PROC 2 /* wait for the process to complete */ #define UMH_KILLABLE 4 /* wait for EXEC/PROC killable */ bpftiler.ko is started once and runs non-stop from there on. Unless it crashes, but it's a different discussion.
+ if (info->hdr->e_type == ET_EXEC) { +#ifdef CONFIG_MODULE_SIG + if (!info->sig_ok) { + pr_notice_once("umh %s verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel\n", + info->file->f_path.dentry->d_name.name); + add_taint(TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK); + } +#endifSo I guess this check is done *after* run_umh() then, what about the enforce mode, don't we want to reject loading at all in any circumstance?
already answered this twice in the thread.
