|
Message-ID: <CAGXu5j+MhA=B3cGZR+btdhz1VNM01uoWFOc2D0bKGJc0Y76q9A@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2017 21:46:20 -0700 From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>, mhocko@...e.de, Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, "benh@...nel.crashing.org" <benh@...nel.crashing.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] x86/mmap: properly account for stack randomization in mmap_base On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:20 AM, <riel@...hat.com> wrote: > From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> > > When RLIMIT_STACK is, for example, 256MB, the current code results in > a gap between the top of the task and mmap_base of 256MB, failing to > take into account the amount by which the stack address was randomized. > In other words, the stack gets less than RLIMIT_STACK space. Is this entirely accurate? The top of the task would be task_size, but this code is using task_size / 6 * 5 as the bottom of stack / top of mmap gap_max. Is there a reason for this? > > Ensure that the gap between the stack and mmap_base always takes stack > randomization into account. > > From Daniel Micay's linux-hardened tree. > > Reported-by: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com> > Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> > --- > arch/x86/mm/mmap.c | 7 ++++++- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/mmap.c b/arch/x86/mm/mmap.c > index 19ad095b41df..8c7ba1adb27b 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/mm/mmap.c > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/mmap.c > @@ -95,13 +95,18 @@ unsigned long arch_mmap_rnd(void) > static unsigned long mmap_base(unsigned long rnd, unsigned long task_size) > { > unsigned long gap = rlimit(RLIMIT_STACK); > + unsigned long pad = stack_maxrandom_size(task_size); > unsigned long gap_min, gap_max; > > + /* Values close to RLIM_INFINITY can overflow. */ > + if (gap + pad > gap) > + gap += pad; > + > /* > * Top of mmap area (just below the process stack). > * Leave an at least ~128 MB hole with possible stack randomization. > */ > - gap_min = SIZE_128M + stack_maxrandom_size(task_size); > + gap_min = SIZE_128M; > gap_max = (task_size / 6) * 5; > > if (gap < gap_min) -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.