|
Message-ID: <476DC76E7D1DF2438D32BFADF679FC560125F272@ORSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:11:28 +0000 From: "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@...el.com> To: Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net> CC: "linux-mm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mm@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>, "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "nnk@...gle.com" <nnk@...gle.com>, "jeffv@...gle.com" <jeffv@...gle.com>, "salyzyn@...roid.com" <salyzyn@...roid.com>, "dcashman@...roid.com" <dcashman@...roid.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH] [RFC] Introduce mmap randomization > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Cooper [mailto:jason@...edaemon.net] > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 1:03 PM > To: Roberts, William C <william.c.roberts@...el.com> > Cc: linux-mm@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; kernel- > hardening@...ts.openwall.com; akpm@...ux-foundation.org; > keescook@...omium.org; gregkh@...uxfoundation.org; nnk@...gle.com; > jeffv@...gle.com; salyzyn@...roid.com; dcashman@...roid.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Introduce mmap randomization > > Hi William! > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 11:22:26AM -0700, william.c.roberts@...el.com wrote: > > From: William Roberts <william.c.roberts@...el.com> > > > > This patch introduces the ability randomize mmap locations where the > > address is not requested, for instance when ld is allocating pages for > > shared libraries. It chooses to randomize based on the current > > personality for ASLR. > > Now I see how you found the randomize_range() fix. :-P > > > Currently, allocations are done sequentially within unmapped address > > space gaps. This may happen top down or bottom up depending on scheme. > > > > For instance these mmap calls produce contiguous mappings: > > int size = getpagesize(); > > mmap(NULL, size, flags, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = > 0x40026000 > > mmap(NULL, size, flags, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = > 0x40027000 > > > > Note no gap between. > > > > After patches: > > int size = getpagesize(); > > mmap(NULL, size, flags, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = > 0x400b4000 > > mmap(NULL, size, flags, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = > 0x40055000 > > > > Note gap between. > > > > Using the test program mentioned here, that allocates fixed sized > > blocks till exhaustion: > > https://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2011-05/msg00252.html, > > no difference was noticed in the number of allocations. Most varied > > from run to run, but were always within a few allocations of one > > another between patched and un-patched runs. > > Did you test this with different allocation sizes? No I didn't it. I wasn't sure the best way to test this, any ideas? > > > Performance Measurements: > > Using strace with -T option and filtering for mmap on the program ls > > shows a slowdown of approximate 3.7% > > I think it would be helpful to show the effect on the resulting object code. Do you mean the maps of the process? I have some captures for whoopsie on my Ubuntu system I can share. One thing I didn't make clear in my commit message is why this is good. Right now, if you know An address within in a process, you know all offsets done with mmap(). For instance, an offset To libX can yield libY by adding/subtracting an offset. This is meant to make rops a bit harder, or In general any mapping offset mmore difficult to find/guess. > > > Signed-off-by: William Roberts <william.c.roberts@...el.com> > > --- > > mm/mmap.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c > > index de2c176..7891272 100644 > > --- a/mm/mmap.c > > +++ b/mm/mmap.c > > @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ > > #include <linux/userfaultfd_k.h> > > #include <linux/moduleparam.h> > > #include <linux/pkeys.h> > > +#include <linux/random.h> > > > > #include <asm/uaccess.h> > > #include <asm/cacheflush.h> > > @@ -1582,6 +1583,24 @@ unacct_error: > > return error; > > } > > > > +/* > > + * Generate a random address within a range. This differs from > > +randomize_addr() by randomizing > > + * on len sized chunks. This helps prevent fragmentation of the virtual > memory map. > > + */ > > +static unsigned long randomize_mmap(unsigned long start, unsigned > > +long end, unsigned long len) { > > + unsigned long slots; > > + > > + if ((current->personality & ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) || > !randomize_va_space) > > + return 0; > > Couldn't we avoid checking this every time? Say, by assigning a function pointer > during init? Yeah that could be done. I just copied the way others checked elsewhere in the kernel :-P > > > + > > + slots = (end - start)/len; > > + if (!slots) > > + return 0; > > + > > + return PAGE_ALIGN(start + ((get_random_long() % slots) * len)); } > > + > > Personally, I'd prefer this function noop out based on a configuration option. Me too. > > > unsigned long unmapped_area(struct vm_unmapped_area_info *info) { > > /* > > @@ -1676,6 +1695,8 @@ found: > > if (gap_start < info->low_limit) > > gap_start = info->low_limit; > > > > + gap_start = randomize_mmap(gap_start, gap_end, length) ? : > > +gap_start; > > + > > /* Adjust gap address to the desired alignment */ > > gap_start += (info->align_offset - gap_start) & info->align_mask; > > > > @@ -1775,6 +1796,9 @@ found: > > found_highest: > > /* Compute highest gap address at the desired alignment */ > > gap_end -= info->length; > > + > > + gap_end = randomize_mmap(gap_start, gap_end, length) ? : gap_end; > > + > > gap_end -= (gap_end - info->align_offset) & info->align_mask; > > > > VM_BUG_ON(gap_end < info->low_limit); > > I'll have to dig into the mm code more before I can comment intelligently on this. > > thx, > > Jason.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.