|
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jJF0g7Yw+2PDw_woyv0GsCOrX61noMu00p-hSO4Thi65Q@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 09:39:52 -0700 From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> To: PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@...il.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>, Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>, Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>, David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/refcount: Implement fast refcount_t handling On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 4:26 AM, PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu> wrote: > INT_MAX threads would be needed when the leaking path is locked so > that it can only be exercised once and you'll need to get normal > (balanced) paths preempted just after the increment. if the leaking > path is lockless (can be exercised in parallel without bounds) then > 2 threads are enough where the one triggering the signed overflow > would have to be preempted while the other one does INT_MAX increments > and trigger the UAF. this is where the other mechanisms i talked about > in the past become relevant: preemption or interrupts can be disabled > or negative refcount values can be detected and acted upon (your blind > copy-pasting effort passed upon this latter opportunity by not > specializing the 'jo' into 'js' for the refcount case). Well, it's not "blind" -- I'm trying to bring the code as-is to upstream for discussion/examination with as little functional differences as possible so it's easier to compare apples to apples. (Which already resulted in more eyes looking at the code to find a bug -- thanks Jann!) But yes, jo -> js hugely increases the coverage. I'll make that change for v2. Thanks! -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.