[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8ffc77a9-6eae-7287-0ea3-56bfb61758cd@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 12:42:14 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>, juergh@...il.com, tycho@...ho.ws,
jsteckli@...zon.de, ak@...ux.intel.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
liran.alon@...cle.com, keescook@...gle.com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com
Cc: deepa.srinivasan@...cle.com, chris.hyser@...cle.com,
tyhicks@...onical.com, dwmw@...zon.co.uk, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com,
jcm@...hat.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, kanth.ghatraju@...cle.com,
joao.m.martins@...cle.com, jmattson@...gle.com, pradeep.vincent@...cle.com,
john.haxby@...cle.com, tglx@...utronix.de, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
hch@....de, steven.sistare@...cle.com, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v7 00/16] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame
Ownership
>> The second process could easily have the page's old TLB entry. It could
>> abuse that entry as long as that CPU doesn't context switch
>> (switch_mm_irqs_off()) or otherwise flush the TLB entry.
>
> That is an interesting scenario. Working through this scenario, physmap
> TLB entry for a page is flushed on the local processor when the page is
> allocated to userspace, in xpfo_alloc_pages(). When the userspace passes
> page back into kernel, that page is mapped into kernel space using a va
> from kmap pool in xpfo_kmap() which can be different for each new
> mapping of the same page. The physical page is unmapped from kernel on
> the way back from kernel to userspace by xpfo_kunmap(). So two processes
> on different CPUs sharing same physical page might not be seeing the
> same virtual address for that page while they are in the kernel, as long
> as it is an address from kmap pool. ret2dir attack relies upon being
> able to craft a predictable virtual address in the kernel physmap for a
> physical page and redirect execution to that address. Does that sound right?
All processes share one set of kernel page tables. Or, did your patches
change that somehow that I missed?
Since they share the page tables, they implicitly share kmap*()
mappings. kmap_atomic() is not *used* by more than one CPU, but the
mapping is accessible and at least exists for all processors.
I'm basically assuming that any entry mapped in a shared page table is
exploitable on any CPU regardless of where we logically *want* it to be
used.
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.
