|
Message-ID: <20180206192925.qkmghwsbaysr4iv2@hermes.olymp> Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 19:29:25 +0000 From: Luis Henriques <lhenriques@...e.com> To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, x86@...nel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, tglx@...utronix.de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...ux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/10] x86: narrow out of bounds syscalls to sys_read under speculation On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 04:02:21PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > The syscall table base is a user controlled function pointer in kernel > space. Like, 'get_user, use 'MASK_NOSPEC' to prevent any out of bounds > speculation. While retpoline prevents speculating into the user > controlled target it does not stop the pointer de-reference, the concern > is leaking memory relative to the syscall table base. This patch seems to cause a regression. An easy way to reproduce what I'm seeing is to run the samples/statx/test-statx. Here's what I see when I have this patchset applied: # ./test-statx /tmp statx(/tmp) = -1 /tmp: Bad file descriptor Reverting this single patch seems to fix it. Cheers, -- Luís > > Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com> > Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> > Cc: x86@...nel.org > Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> > --- > arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S | 2 ++ > arch/x86/include/asm/smap.h | 9 ++++++++- > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S > index 4f8e1d35a97c..2320017077d4 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S > +++ b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S > @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ > #include <asm/asm.h> > #include <asm/smap.h> > #include <asm/pgtable_types.h> > +#include <asm/smap.h> > #include <asm/export.h> > #include <asm/frame.h> > #include <asm/nospec-branch.h> > @@ -264,6 +265,7 @@ entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath: > cmpl $__NR_syscall_max, %eax > #endif > ja 1f /* return -ENOSYS (already in pt_regs->ax) */ > + MASK_NOSPEC %r11 %rax /* sanitize syscall_nr wrt speculation */ > movq %r10, %rcx > > /* > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/smap.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/smap.h > index 2b4ad4c6a226..3b5b2cf58dc6 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/smap.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/smap.h > @@ -35,7 +35,14 @@ > * this directs the cpu to speculate with a NULL ptr rather than > * something targeting kernel memory. > * > - * assumes CF is set from a previous 'cmp TASK_addr_limit, %ptr' > + * In the syscall entry path it is possible to speculate past the > + * validation of the system call number. Use MASK_NOSPEC to sanitize the > + * syscall array index to zero (sys_read) rather than an arbitrary > + * target. > + * > + * assumes CF is set from a previous 'cmp' i.e.: > + * cmp TASK_addr_limit, %ptr > + * cmp __NR_syscall_max, %idx > */ > .macro MASK_NOSPEC mask val > sbb \mask, \mask > >
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.