[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jKaz_rAi_R2x3V73306fw+1MOBN-6v-nK4_S=PU8_pzhA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:21:09 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>, "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, David Windsor <dave@...lcore.net>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Luis de Bethencourt <luisbg@...nel.org>, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 34/38] arm: Implement thread_struct whitelist for hardened usercopy
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:24 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@...linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 06:03:06PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>> ARM does not carry FPU state in the thread structure, so it can declare
>> no usercopy whitelist at all.
>
> This comment seems to be misleading. We have stored FP state in the
> thread structure for a long time - for example, VFP state is stored
> in thread->vfpstate.hard, so we _do_ have floating point state in
> the thread structure.
>
> What I think this commit message needs to describe is why we don't
> need a whitelist _despite_ having FP state in the thread structure.
>
> At the moment, the commit message is making me think that this patch
> is wrong and will introduce a regression.
Yeah, I will improve this comment; it's not clear enough. The places
where I see state copied to/from userspace are all either static sizes
or already use bounce buffers (or both). e.g.:
err |= __copy_from_user(&hwstate->fpregs, &ufp->fpregs,
sizeof(hwstate->fpregs));
I will adjust the commit log and comment to more clearly describe the
lack of whitelisting due to all-static sized copies.
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.
