[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJcbSZETh-A+zABOzsx+VW3p73AXO4xnc=O_TG7iXaVbD=Zz1A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 13:58:17 -0800
From: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>,
Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>, Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] x86/mm/KASLR: Remap GDTs at fixed location
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 1/5/2017 9:54 AM, Thomas Garnier wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's my goal too. I started by doing a RO remap and got couple
>>>>>> problems with hibernation. I can try again for the next iteration or
>>>>>> delay it for another patch. I also need to look at KVM GDT usage, I am
>>>>>> not familiar with it yet.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> don't we write to the GDT as part of the TLS segment stuff for glibc ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not sure which glibc feature it is.
>>>>
>>>> In this design, you can write to the GDT per-cpu variable that will
>>>> remain read-write. You just need to make the remapping writeable when
>>>> we load task registers (ltr) then the processor use the current GDT
>>>> address. At least that the case I know, I might find more through
>>>> testing.
>>>
>>> Hmm. I bet that if we preset the accessed bits in all the segments
>>> then we don't need it to be writable in general. But your point about
>>> set_thread_area (TLS) is well taken. However, I strongly suspect that
>>> we could make set_thread_area unconditionally set the accessed bit and
>>> no one would ever notice.
>>
>> Not sure I fully understood and I don't want to miss an important
>> point. Do you mean making GDT (remapping and per-cpu) read-only and
>> switch the writeable flag only when we write to the per-cpu entry?
>>
>
> What I mean is: write to the GDT through normal percpu access (or
> whatever the normal mapping is) but load a read-only alias into the
> GDT register. As long as nothing ever tries to write through the GDTR
> alias, no page faults will be generated. So we just need to make sure
> that nothing ever writes to it through GDTR. AFAIK the only reason
> the CPU ever writes to the address in GDTR is to set an accessed bit.
>
A write is made when we use load_TR_desc (ltr). I didn't see any other yet.
> --Andy
--
Thomas
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.
