[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170725071638.pcjo4vqacsblobef@ishxps>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 10:16:38 +0300
From: Hans Liljestrand <liljestrandh@...il.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
"Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] gcc-plugins: adds MPXK gcc plugin
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 07:40:57PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Hans Liljestrand
><liljestrandh@...il.com> wrote:
>> Adds a gcc-plugin that modifies vanilla GCC MPX instrumentation for
>> in-kernel use. Also adds MPXK_CFLAGS Makefile variable that can be used to
>> selectively enable MPXK for specific kernel objects. This plugin is not
>> enabled kernel-wide and must be explicitly enabled in the appropriate
>> Makefile.
>>
>> The purpose of the plugin is to replace BNDSTX+BNDLDX bound storage with
>> our own mpxk_load_bounds function and to replace memory mainpulating
>> function with corresponding wrapper function. The plugin accomplishes
>> this via the following tasks:
>>
>> - It adds MPXK-wrappers functions for memory altering functions, e.g.
>> kmalloc, memcpy, etc. This is needed both to check bounds for input
>> argument pointers and properly set bounds for returned pointers. This
>> is done by the mpxk_wrappers compiler pass. (This could potentially
>> be done, for better performance, by direct instrumentation at the call
>> site.)
>>
>> - Replace BNDLDX calls with mpxk_load_bounds function calls. This
>> includes two separate cases: free-standing loads handled by the
>> mpxk_bnd_store pass, and loads in function prologues that are handled
>> by the mpxk_cfun_args pass. These are needed for situation where the
>> compile time instrumentation cannot determine a way to statically
>> propagate the bounds via the stack or registers.
>>
>> - The final mpxk_pass_sweeper removes any remaining BNDLDX/BNDSTX calls.
>
>Since this creates multiple files for a single plugin, can you instead
>relocate these into a subdirectory (which should be supported by the
>build system already).
Thanks. I was a bit unsure how to organize these in the first place, but a
subdirectory sounds like a good idea. I'll also look at consolidating the
non-pass files into one.
Regards,
-hans
>
>-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.
