| =========================================== |
| Seccomp BPF (SECure COMPuting with filters) |
| =========================================== |
| |
| Introduction |
| ============ |
| |
| A large number of system calls are exposed to every userland process |
| with many of them going unused for the entire lifetime of the process. |
| As system calls change and mature, bugs are found and eradicated. A |
| certain subset of userland applications benefit by having a reduced set |
| of available system calls. The resulting set reduces the total kernel |
| surface exposed to the application. System call filtering is meant for |
| use with those applications. |
| |
| Seccomp filtering provides a means for a process to specify a filter for |
| incoming system calls. The filter is expressed as a Berkeley Packet |
| Filter (BPF) program, as with socket filters, except that the data |
| operated on is related to the system call being made: system call |
| number and the system call arguments. This allows for expressive |
| filtering of system calls using a filter program language with a long |
| history of being exposed to userland and a straightforward data set. |
| |
| Additionally, BPF makes it impossible for users of seccomp to fall prey |
| to time-of-check-time-of-use (TOCTOU) attacks that are common in system |
| call interposition frameworks. BPF programs may not dereference |
| pointers which constrains all filters to solely evaluating the system |
| call arguments directly. |
| |
| What it isn't |
| ============= |
| |
| System call filtering isn't a sandbox. It provides a clearly defined |
| mechanism for minimizing the exposed kernel surface. It is meant to be |
| a tool for sandbox developers to use. Beyond that, policy for logical |
| behavior and information flow should be managed with a combination of |
| other system hardening techniques and, potentially, an LSM of your |
| choosing. Expressive, dynamic filters provide further options down this |
| path (avoiding pathological sizes or selecting which of the multiplexed |
| system calls in socketcall() is allowed, for instance) which could be |
| construed, incorrectly, as a more complete sandboxing solution. |
| |
| Usage |
| ===== |
| |
| An additional seccomp mode is added and is enabled using the same |
| prctl(2) call as the strict seccomp. If the architecture has |
| ``CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER``, then filters may be added as below: |
| |
| ``PR_SET_SECCOMP``: |
| Now takes an additional argument which specifies a new filter |
| using a BPF program. |
| The BPF program will be executed over struct seccomp_data |
| reflecting the system call number, arguments, and other |
| metadata. The BPF program must then return one of the |
| acceptable values to inform the kernel which action should be |
| taken. |
| |
| Usage:: |
| |
| prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, prog); |
| |
| The 'prog' argument is a pointer to a struct sock_fprog which |
| will contain the filter program. If the program is invalid, the |
| call will return -1 and set errno to ``EINVAL``. |
| |
| If ``fork``/``clone`` and ``execve`` are allowed by @prog, any child |
| processes will be constrained to the same filters and system |
| call ABI as the parent. |
| |
| Prior to use, the task must call ``prctl(PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, 1)`` or |
| run with ``CAP_SYS_ADMIN`` privileges in its namespace. If these are not |
| true, ``-EACCES`` will be returned. This requirement ensures that filter |
| programs cannot be applied to child processes with greater privileges |
| than the task that installed them. |
| |
| Additionally, if ``prctl(2)`` is allowed by the attached filter, |
| additional filters may be layered on which will increase evaluation |
| time, but allow for further decreasing the attack surface during |
| execution of a process. |
| |
| The above call returns 0 on success and non-zero on error. |
| |
| Return values |
| ============= |
| |
| A seccomp filter may return any of the following values. If multiple |
| filters exist, the return value for the evaluation of a given system |
| call will always use the highest precedent value. (For example, |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_KILL_PROCESS`` will always take precedence.) |
| |
| In precedence order, they are: |
| |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_KILL_PROCESS``: |
| Results in the entire process exiting immediately without executing |
| the system call. The exit status of the task (``status & 0x7f``) |
| will be ``SIGSYS``, not ``SIGKILL``. |
| |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_KILL_THREAD``: |
| Results in the task exiting immediately without executing the |
| system call. The exit status of the task (``status & 0x7f``) will |
| be ``SIGSYS``, not ``SIGKILL``. |
| |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_TRAP``: |
| Results in the kernel sending a ``SIGSYS`` signal to the triggering |
| task without executing the system call. ``siginfo->si_call_addr`` |
| will show the address of the system call instruction, and |
| ``siginfo->si_syscall`` and ``siginfo->si_arch`` will indicate which |
| syscall was attempted. The program counter will be as though |
| the syscall happened (i.e. it will not point to the syscall |
| instruction). The return value register will contain an arch- |
| dependent value -- if resuming execution, set it to something |
| sensible. (The architecture dependency is because replacing |
| it with ``-ENOSYS`` could overwrite some useful information.) |
| |
| The ``SECCOMP_RET_DATA`` portion of the return value will be passed |
| as ``si_errno``. |
| |
| ``SIGSYS`` triggered by seccomp will have a si_code of ``SYS_SECCOMP``. |
| |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_ERRNO``: |
| Results in the lower 16-bits of the return value being passed |
| to userland as the errno without executing the system call. |
| |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_TRACE``: |
| When returned, this value will cause the kernel to attempt to |
| notify a ``ptrace()``-based tracer prior to executing the system |
| call. If there is no tracer present, ``-ENOSYS`` is returned to |
| userland and the system call is not executed. |
| |
| A tracer will be notified if it requests ``PTRACE_O_TRACESECCOM``P |
| using ``ptrace(PTRACE_SETOPTIONS)``. The tracer will be notified |
| of a ``PTRACE_EVENT_SECCOMP`` and the ``SECCOMP_RET_DATA`` portion of |
| the BPF program return value will be available to the tracer |
| via ``PTRACE_GETEVENTMSG``. |
| |
| The tracer can skip the system call by changing the syscall number |
| to -1. Alternatively, the tracer can change the system call |
| requested by changing the system call to a valid syscall number. If |
| the tracer asks to skip the system call, then the system call will |
| appear to return the value that the tracer puts in the return value |
| register. |
| |
| The seccomp check will not be run again after the tracer is |
| notified. (This means that seccomp-based sandboxes MUST NOT |
| allow use of ptrace, even of other sandboxed processes, without |
| extreme care; ptracers can use this mechanism to escape.) |
| |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_LOG``: |
| Results in the system call being executed after it is logged. This |
| should be used by application developers to learn which syscalls their |
| application needs without having to iterate through multiple test and |
| development cycles to build the list. |
| |
| This action will only be logged if "log" is present in the |
| actions_logged sysctl string. |
| |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW``: |
| Results in the system call being executed. |
| |
| If multiple filters exist, the return value for the evaluation of a |
| given system call will always use the highest precedent value. |
| |
| Precedence is only determined using the ``SECCOMP_RET_ACTION`` mask. When |
| multiple filters return values of the same precedence, only the |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_DATA`` from the most recently installed filter will be |
| returned. |
| |
| Pitfalls |
| ======== |
| |
| The biggest pitfall to avoid during use is filtering on system call |
| number without checking the architecture value. Why? On any |
| architecture that supports multiple system call invocation conventions, |
| the system call numbers may vary based on the specific invocation. If |
| the numbers in the different calling conventions overlap, then checks in |
| the filters may be abused. Always check the arch value! |
| |
| Example |
| ======= |
| |
| The ``samples/seccomp/`` directory contains both an x86-specific example |
| and a more generic example of a higher level macro interface for BPF |
| program generation. |
| |
| Sysctls |
| ======= |
| |
| Seccomp's sysctl files can be found in the ``/proc/sys/kernel/seccomp/`` |
| directory. Here's a description of each file in that directory: |
| |
| ``actions_avail``: |
| A read-only ordered list of seccomp return values (refer to the |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_*`` macros above) in string form. The ordering, from |
| left-to-right, is the least permissive return value to the most |
| permissive return value. |
| |
| The list represents the set of seccomp return values supported |
| by the kernel. A userspace program may use this list to |
| determine if the actions found in the ``seccomp.h``, when the |
| program was built, differs from the set of actions actually |
| supported in the current running kernel. |
| |
| ``actions_logged``: |
| A read-write ordered list of seccomp return values (refer to the |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_*`` macros above) that are allowed to be logged. Writes |
| to the file do not need to be in ordered form but reads from the file |
| will be ordered in the same way as the actions_avail sysctl. |
| |
| The ``allow`` string is not accepted in the ``actions_logged`` sysctl |
| as it is not possible to log ``SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW`` actions. Attempting |
| to write ``allow`` to the sysctl will result in an EINVAL being |
| returned. |
| |
| Adding architecture support |
| =========================== |
| |
| See ``arch/Kconfig`` for the authoritative requirements. In general, if an |
| architecture supports both ptrace_event and seccomp, it will be able to |
| support seccomp filter with minor fixup: ``SIGSYS`` support and seccomp return |
| value checking. Then it must just add ``CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER`` |
| to its arch-specific Kconfig. |
| |
| |
| |
| Caveats |
| ======= |
| |
| The vDSO can cause some system calls to run entirely in userspace, |
| leading to surprises when you run programs on different machines that |
| fall back to real syscalls. To minimize these surprises on x86, make |
| sure you test with |
| ``/sys/devices/system/clocksource/clocksource0/current_clocksource`` set to |
| something like ``acpi_pm``. |
| |
| On x86-64, vsyscall emulation is enabled by default. (vsyscalls are |
| legacy variants on vDSO calls.) Currently, emulated vsyscalls will |
| honor seccomp, with a few oddities: |
| |
| - A return value of ``SECCOMP_RET_TRAP`` will set a ``si_call_addr`` pointing to |
| the vsyscall entry for the given call and not the address after the |
| 'syscall' instruction. Any code which wants to restart the call |
| should be aware that (a) a ret instruction has been emulated and (b) |
| trying to resume the syscall will again trigger the standard vsyscall |
| emulation security checks, making resuming the syscall mostly |
| pointless. |
| |
| - A return value of ``SECCOMP_RET_TRACE`` will signal the tracer as usual, |
| but the syscall may not be changed to another system call using the |
| orig_rax register. It may only be changed to -1 order to skip the |
| currently emulated call. Any other change MAY terminate the process. |
| The rip value seen by the tracer will be the syscall entry address; |
| this is different from normal behavior. The tracer MUST NOT modify |
| rip or rsp. (Do not rely on other changes terminating the process. |
| They might work. For example, on some kernels, choosing a syscall |
| that only exists in future kernels will be correctly emulated (by |
| returning ``-ENOSYS``). |
| |
| To detect this quirky behavior, check for ``addr & ~0x0C00 == |
| 0xFFFFFFFFFF600000``. (For ``SECCOMP_RET_TRACE``, use rip. For |
| ``SECCOMP_RET_TRAP``, use ``siginfo->si_call_addr``.) Do not check any other |
| condition: future kernels may improve vsyscall emulation and current |
| kernels in vsyscall=native mode will behave differently, but the |
| instructions at ``0xF...F600{0,4,8,C}00`` will not be system calls in these |
| cases. |
| |
| Note that modern systems are unlikely to use vsyscalls at all -- they |
| are a legacy feature and they are considerably slower than standard |
| syscalls. New code will use the vDSO, and vDSO-issued system calls |
| are indistinguishable from normal system calls. |