|
Message-ID: <35e6c660-3896-bdb8-45f3-c1504aa2171f@huawei.com> Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 10:17:28 +0800 From: Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com> To: Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>, Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>, <mpe@...erman.id.au>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, <diana.craciun@....com>, <christophe.leroy@....fr>, <benh@...nel.crashing.org>, <paulus@...ba.org>, <npiggin@...il.com>, <keescook@...omium.org>, <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, <me@...in.cc> CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <zhaohongjiang@...wei.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] implement KASLR for powerpc/fsl_booke/64 在 2020/3/1 6:54, Scott Wood 写道: > On Sat, 2020-02-29 at 15:27 +0800, Jason Yan wrote: >> >> 在 2020/2/29 12:28, Scott Wood 写道: >>> On Fri, 2020-02-28 at 14:47 +0800, Jason Yan wrote: >>>> >>>> 在 2020/2/28 13:53, Scott Wood 写道: >>>>> >>>>> I don't see any debug setting for %pK (or %p) to always print the >>>>> actual >>>>> address (closest is kptr_restrict=1 but that only works in certain >>>>> contexts)... from looking at the code it seems it hashes even if kaslr >>>>> is >>>>> entirely disabled? Or am I missing something? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, %pK (or %p) always hashes whether kaslr is disabled or not. So if >>>> we want the real value of the address, we cannot use it. But if you only >>>> want to distinguish if two pointers are the same, it's ok. >>> >>> Am I the only one that finds this a bit crazy? If you want to lock a >>> system >>> down then fine, but why wage war on debugging even when there's no >>> randomization going on? Comparing two pointers for equality is not always >>> adequate. >>> >> >> AFAIK, %p hashing is only exist because of many legacy address printings >> and force who really want the raw values to switch to %px or even %lx. >> It's not the opposite of debugging. Raw address printing is not >> forbidden, only people need to estimate the risk of adrdress leaks. > > Yes, but I don't see any format specifier to switch to that will hash in a > randomized production environment, but not in a debug or other non-randomized > environment which seems like the ideal default for most debug output. > Sorry I have no idea why there is no format specifier considered for switching of randomized or non-randomized environment. May they think that raw address should not leak in non-randomized environment too. May be Kees or Tobin can answer this question. Kees? Tobin? >> >> Turnning to %p may not be a good idea in this situation. So >> for the REG logs printed when dumping stack, we can disable it when >> KASLR is open. For the REG logs in other places like show_regs(), only >> privileged can trigger it, and they are not combind with a symbol, so >> I think it's ok to keep them. >> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c >> index fad50db9dcf2..659c51f0739a 100644 >> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c >> @@ -2068,7 +2068,10 @@ void show_stack(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned >> long *stack) >> newsp = stack[0]; >> ip = stack[STACK_FRAME_LR_SAVE]; >> if (!firstframe || ip != lr) { >> - printk("["REG"] ["REG"] %pS", sp, ip, (void *)ip); >> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE)) >> + printk("%pS", (void *)ip); >> + else >> + printk("["REG"] ["REG"] %pS", sp, ip, >> (void *)ip); > > This doesn't deal with "nokaslr" on the kernel command line. It also doesn't > seem like something that every callsite should have to opencode, versus having > an appropriate format specifier behaves as I described above (and I still > don't see why that format specifier should not be "%p"). > Actually I still do not understand why we should print the raw value here. When KALLSYMS is enabled we have symbol name and offset like put_cred_rcu+0x108/0x110, and when KALLSYMS is disabled we have the raw address. > -Scott > > > > . >
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.