[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5j+e8u82zjcmhMhvhwgDMyJ4pAsi5vz-Z7J_i42d5nZq3A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 20:52:26 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu>, 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>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86, refcount: Implement fast refcount overflow protection
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>> This protection is a modified version of the x86 PAX_REFCOUNT
>> implementation from PaX/grsecurity. This speeds up the refcount_t API by
>> duplicating the existing atomic_t implementation with a single instruction
>> added to detect if the refcount has wrapped past INT_MAX (or below 0)
>> resulting in a signed value.
> [...]
>> +static __always_inline void refcount_dec(refcount_t *r)
>> +{
>> + asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX "decl %0\n\t"
>> + REFCOUNT_CHECK_UNDERFLOW(4)
>> + : [counter] "+m" (r->refs.counter)
>> + : : "cc", "cx");
>> +}
>
> What purpose do checks on decrement now have? The mitigation is only
> intended to deal with (positive) overflows, right? AFAICS if you hit this code,
> similar to the inc-from-0 case, you're already in a UAF situation?
Yeah, I think that's true, but as Peter has mentioned: it's better
than not having it. The inc path can be deterministic, and the dec
path can be lucky? :)
-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.
