|
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jJaywA3xC418G4h=EXHU-rovHW27wwQs3yUb-Jj+75_2Q@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 16:47:33 -0800 From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> To: James Morse <james.morse@....com> Cc: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Pratyush Anand <panand@...hat.com>, keun-o.park@...kmatter.ae Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] arm64: Add arch_within_stack_frames() for hardened usercopy On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:29 AM, James Morse <james.morse@....com> wrote: > Hardened usercopy tests that an object being copied to/from userspace > doesn't overlap multiple stack frames. > > Add arch_within_stack_frames() to do this using arm64's stackwalker. The > callback looks for 'fp' appearing with the range occupied by the object. > > (This isn't enough to trip the lkdtm tests on arm64) > > CC: Sahara <keun-o.park@...kmatter.ae> > Based-on-a-patch-from: Sahara <keun-o.park@...kmatter.ae> > Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@....com> > --- > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 + > arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h | 7 ++++- > arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 3 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig > index 111742126897..378caa9c0563 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig > @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ config ARM64 > select HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK > select HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE > select HAVE_ARM_SMCCC > + select HAVE_ARCH_WITHIN_STACK_FRAMES > select HAVE_EBPF_JIT > select HAVE_C_RECORDMCOUNT > select HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h > index 46c3b93cf865..3540c46027fc 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h > @@ -68,7 +68,12 @@ struct thread_info { > #define thread_saved_fp(tsk) \ > ((unsigned long)(tsk->thread.cpu_context.fp)) > > -#endif > + > +extern enum stack_type arch_within_stack_frames(const void * const stack, > + const void * const stackend, > + const void *obj, > + unsigned long len); The caller of arch_within_stack_frames expects this to be inlined... could that be changed and then move the special stack check from the third patch into check_stack_object() directly? Regardless, I'm fine with reusing the existing walker. I just want to avoid special cases in the uaccess code (so we can consolidate it in the future). -Kees -- Kees Cook Pixel Security
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.