Git-Mirrors/DivestOS
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/Divested-Mobile/DivestOS-Build.git synced 2024-10-01 01:35:54 -04:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
f20edeeb0c
DivestOS/Patches/LineageOS-17.1/android_frameworks_base/368065-backport.patch
Tad 27066c202f
17.1 October ASB work 
Signed-off-by: Tad <tad@spotco.us>
2023-10-09 19:41:44 -04:00

137 lines
8.1 KiB
Diff
Raw Blame History

From 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2023 22:03:03 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] RESTRICT AUTOMERGE: SettingsProvider: exclude secure_frp_mode
from resets
When RescueParty detects that a system process is crashing frequently,
it tries to recover in various ways, such as by resetting all settings.
Unfortunately, this included resetting the secure_frp_mode setting,
which is the means by which the system keeps track of whether the
Factory Reset Protection (FRP) challenge has been passed yet. With this
setting reset, some FRP restrictions went away and it became possible to
bypass FRP by setting a new lockscreen credential.
Fix this by excluding secure_frp_mode from resets.
Note: currently this bug isn't reproducible on 'main' due to ag/23727749
disabling much of RescueParty, but that is a temporary change.
Bug: 253043065
Test: With ag/23727749 reverted and with my fix to prevent
com.android.settings from crashing *not* applied, tried repeatedly
setting lockscreen credential while in FRP mode, using the
smartlock setup activity launched by intent via adb. Verified
that although RescueParty is still triggered after 5 attempts,
secure_frp_mode is no longer reset (its value remains "1").
Test: Verified that secure_frp_mode still gets changed from 1 to 0 when
FRP is passed legitimately.
Test: atest com.android.providers.settings.SettingsProviderTest
Test: atest android.provider.SettingsProviderTest
(cherry picked from commit 9890dd7f15c091f7d1a09e4fddb9f85d32015955)
(changed Global.SECURE_FRP_MODE to Secure.SECURE_FRP_MODE,
needed because this setting was moved in U)
(removed static keyword from shouldExcludeSettingFromReset(),
needed for compatibility with Java 15 and earlier)
(resolved conflict in resetSettingsLocked())
(cherry picked from https://googleplex-android-review.googlesource.com/q/commit:f0f020c21fd29d8076733e07847e6314172a312e)
Merged-In: Id95ed43b9cc2208090064392bcd5dc012710af93
Change-Id: Id95ed43b9cc2208090064392bcd5dc012710af93
---
.../providers/settings/SettingsProvider.java | 17 ++++++++++---
.../settings/SettingsProviderTest.java | 25 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/packages/SettingsProvider/src/com/android/providers/settings/SettingsProvider.java b/packages/SettingsProvider/src/com/android/providers/settings/SettingsProvider.java
index 760b0604a604..1569129c3797 100644
--- a/packages/SettingsProvider/src/com/android/providers/settings/SettingsProvider.java
+++ b/packages/SettingsProvider/src/com/android/providers/settings/SettingsProvider.java
@@ -2737,6 +2737,15 @@ public class SettingsProvider extends ContentProvider {
return settingsState.getSettingLocked(name);
}
+ private boolean shouldExcludeSettingFromReset(Setting setting, String prefix) {
+ // If a prefix was specified, exclude settings whose names don't start with it.
+ if (prefix != null && !setting.getName().startsWith(prefix)) {
+ return true;
+ }
+ // Never reset SECURE_FRP_MODE, as it could be abused to bypass FRP via RescueParty.
+ return Secure.SECURE_FRP_MODE.equals(setting.getName());
+ }
+
public void resetSettingsLocked(int type, int userId, String packageName, int mode,
String tag) {
resetSettingsLocked(type, userId, packageName, mode, tag, null);
@@ -2757,7 +2766,7 @@ public class SettingsProvider extends ContentProvider {
Setting setting = settingsState.getSettingLocked(name);
if (packageName.equals(setting.getPackageName())) {
if ((tag != null && !tag.equals(setting.getTag()))
- || (prefix != null && !setting.getName().startsWith(prefix))) {
+ || shouldExcludeSettingFromReset(setting, prefix)) {
continue;
}
if (settingsState.resetSettingLocked(name)) {
@@ -2777,7 +2786,7 @@ public class SettingsProvider extends ContentProvider {
Setting setting = settingsState.getSettingLocked(name);
if (!SettingsState.isSystemPackage(getContext(),
setting.getPackageName(), INVALID_UID, userId)) {
- if (prefix != null && !setting.getName().startsWith(prefix)) {
+ if (shouldExcludeSettingFromReset(setting, prefix)) {
continue;
}
if (settingsState.resetSettingLocked(name)) {
@@ -2797,7 +2806,7 @@ public class SettingsProvider extends ContentProvider {
Setting setting = settingsState.getSettingLocked(name);
if (!SettingsState.isSystemPackage(getContext(),
setting.getPackageName(), INVALID_UID, userId)) {
- if (prefix != null && !setting.getName().startsWith(prefix)) {
+ if (shouldExcludeSettingFromReset(setting, prefix)) {
continue;
}
if (setting.isDefaultFromSystem()) {
@@ -2820,7 +2829,7 @@ public class SettingsProvider extends ContentProvider {
for (String name : settingsState.getSettingNamesLocked()) {
Setting setting = settingsState.getSettingLocked(name);
boolean someSettingChanged = false;
- if (prefix != null && !setting.getName().startsWith(prefix)) {
+ if (shouldExcludeSettingFromReset(setting, prefix)) {
continue;
}
if (setting.isDefaultFromSystem()) {
diff --git a/packages/SettingsProvider/test/src/com/android/providers/settings/SettingsProviderTest.java b/packages/SettingsProvider/test/src/com/android/providers/settings/SettingsProviderTest.java
index 183f5997a6b5..47c15d257ded 100644
--- a/packages/SettingsProvider/test/src/com/android/providers/settings/SettingsProviderTest.java
+++ b/packages/SettingsProvider/test/src/com/android/providers/settings/SettingsProviderTest.java
@@ -463,6 +463,31 @@ public class SettingsProviderTest extends BaseSettingsProviderTest {
}
}
+ // To prevent FRP bypasses, the SECURE_FRP_MODE setting should not be reset when all other
+ // settings are reset. But it should still be possible to explicitly set its value.
+ @Test
+ public void testSecureFrpModeSettingCannotBeReset() throws Exception {
+ final String name = Settings.Secure.SECURE_FRP_MODE;
+ final String origValue = getSetting(SETTING_TYPE_GLOBAL, name);
+ setSettingViaShell(SETTING_TYPE_GLOBAL, name, "1", false);
+ try {
+ assertEquals("1", getSetting(SETTING_TYPE_GLOBAL, name));
+ for (int type : new int[] { SETTING_TYPE_GLOBAL, SETTING_TYPE_SECURE }) {
+ resetSettingsViaShell(type, Settings.RESET_MODE_UNTRUSTED_DEFAULTS);
+ resetSettingsViaShell(type, Settings.RESET_MODE_UNTRUSTED_CHANGES);
+ resetSettingsViaShell(type, Settings.RESET_MODE_TRUSTED_DEFAULTS);
+ }
+ // The value should still be "1". It should not have been reset to null.
+ assertEquals("1", getSetting(SETTING_TYPE_GLOBAL, name));
+ // It should still be possible to explicitly set the value to "0".
+ setSettingViaShell(SETTING_TYPE_GLOBAL, name, "0", false);
+ assertEquals("0", getSetting(SETTING_TYPE_GLOBAL, name));
+ } finally {
+ setSettingViaShell(SETTING_TYPE_GLOBAL, name, origValue, false);
+ assertEquals(origValue, getSetting(SETTING_TYPE_GLOBAL, name));
+ }
+ }
+
private void doTestQueryStringInBracketsViaProviderApiForType(int type) {
// Make sure we have a clean slate.
deleteStringViaProviderApi(type, FAKE_SETTING_NAME);
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink