|
Message-ID: <6a96f2d6-ae15-7745-9c22-cf8cb1980afe@csgroup.eu> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 08:37:50 +0200 From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu> To: "Christopher M. Riedl" <cmr@...ormatik.wtf>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] powerpc: Add LKDTM test to hijack a patch mapping Le 03/06/2020 à 07:19, Christopher M. Riedl a écrit : > When live patching with STRICT_KERNEL_RWX, the CPU doing the patching > must use a temporary mapping which allows for writing to kernel text. > During the entire window of time when this temporary mapping is in use, > another CPU could write to the same mapping and maliciously alter kernel > text. Implement a LKDTM test to attempt to exploit such a openings when > a CPU is patching under STRICT_KERNEL_RWX. The test is only implemented > on powerpc for now. > > The LKDTM "hijack" test works as follows: > > 1. A CPU executes an infinite loop to patch an instruction. > This is the "patching" CPU. > 2. Another CPU attempts to write to the address of the temporary > mapping used by the "patching" CPU. This other CPU is the > "hijacker" CPU. The hijack either fails with a segfault or > succeeds, in which case some kernel text is now overwritten. > > How to run the test: > > mount -t debugfs none /sys/kernel/debug > (echo HIJACK_PATCH > /sys/kernel/debug/provoke-crash/DIRECT) > > Signed-off-by: Christopher M. Riedl <cmr@...ormatik.wtf> > --- > drivers/misc/lkdtm/core.c | 1 + > drivers/misc/lkdtm/lkdtm.h | 1 + > drivers/misc/lkdtm/perms.c | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 103 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/misc/lkdtm/core.c b/drivers/misc/lkdtm/core.c > index a5e344df9166..482e72f6a1e1 100644 > --- a/drivers/misc/lkdtm/core.c > +++ b/drivers/misc/lkdtm/core.c > @@ -145,6 +145,7 @@ static const struct crashtype crashtypes[] = { > CRASHTYPE(WRITE_RO), > CRASHTYPE(WRITE_RO_AFTER_INIT), > CRASHTYPE(WRITE_KERN), > + CRASHTYPE(HIJACK_PATCH), > CRASHTYPE(REFCOUNT_INC_OVERFLOW), > CRASHTYPE(REFCOUNT_ADD_OVERFLOW), > CRASHTYPE(REFCOUNT_INC_NOT_ZERO_OVERFLOW), > diff --git a/drivers/misc/lkdtm/lkdtm.h b/drivers/misc/lkdtm/lkdtm.h > index 601a2156a0d4..bfcf3542370d 100644 > --- a/drivers/misc/lkdtm/lkdtm.h > +++ b/drivers/misc/lkdtm/lkdtm.h > @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ void lkdtm_EXEC_USERSPACE(void); > void lkdtm_EXEC_NULL(void); > void lkdtm_ACCESS_USERSPACE(void); > void lkdtm_ACCESS_NULL(void); > +void lkdtm_HIJACK_PATCH(void); > > /* lkdtm_refcount.c */ > void lkdtm_REFCOUNT_INC_OVERFLOW(void); > diff --git a/drivers/misc/lkdtm/perms.c b/drivers/misc/lkdtm/perms.c > index 62f76d506f04..8bda3b56bc78 100644 > --- a/drivers/misc/lkdtm/perms.c > +++ b/drivers/misc/lkdtm/perms.c > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ > #include <linux/vmalloc.h> > #include <linux/mman.h> > #include <linux/uaccess.h> > +#include <linux/kthread.h> > #include <asm/cacheflush.h> > > /* Whether or not to fill the target memory area with do_nothing(). */ > @@ -213,6 +214,106 @@ void lkdtm_ACCESS_NULL(void) > *ptr = tmp; > } > > +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC) && defined(CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX) Should also depend on CONFIG_SMP. Christophe > +#include <include/asm/code-patching.h> > + > +extern unsigned long read_cpu_patching_addr(unsigned int cpu); > + > +static struct ppc_inst * const patch_site = (struct ppc_inst *)&do_nothing; > + > +static int lkdtm_patching_cpu(void *data) > +{ > + int err = 0; > + struct ppc_inst insn = ppc_inst(0xdeadbeef); > + > + pr_info("starting patching_cpu=%d\n", smp_processor_id()); > + do { > + err = patch_instruction(patch_site, insn); > + } while (ppc_inst_equal(ppc_inst_read(READ_ONCE(patch_site)), insn) && > + !err && !kthread_should_stop()); > + > + if (err) > + pr_warn("patch_instruction returned error: %d\n", err); > + > + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); > + while (!kthread_should_stop()) { > + schedule(); > + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); > + } > + > + return err; > +} > + > +void lkdtm_HIJACK_PATCH(void) > +{ > + struct task_struct *patching_kthrd; > + struct ppc_inst original_insn; > + int patching_cpu, hijacker_cpu, attempts; > + unsigned long addr; > + bool hijacked; > + > + if (num_online_cpus() < 2) { > + pr_warn("need at least two cpus\n"); > + return; > + } > + > + original_insn = ppc_inst_read(READ_ONCE(patch_site)); > + > + hijacker_cpu = smp_processor_id(); > + patching_cpu = cpumask_any_but(cpu_online_mask, hijacker_cpu); > + > + patching_kthrd = kthread_create_on_node(&lkdtm_patching_cpu, NULL, > + cpu_to_node(patching_cpu), > + "lkdtm_patching_cpu"); > + kthread_bind(patching_kthrd, patching_cpu); > + wake_up_process(patching_kthrd); > + > + addr = offset_in_page(patch_site) | read_cpu_patching_addr(patching_cpu); > + > + pr_info("starting hijacker_cpu=%d\n", hijacker_cpu); > + for (attempts = 0; attempts < 100000; ++attempts) { > + /* Use __put_user to catch faults without an Oops */ > + hijacked = !__put_user(0xbad00bad, (unsigned int *)addr); > + > + if (hijacked) { > + if (kthread_stop(patching_kthrd)) > + goto out; > + break; > + } > + } > + pr_info("hijack attempts: %d\n", attempts); > + > + if (hijacked) { > + if (*(unsigned int *)READ_ONCE(patch_site) == 0xbad00bad) > + pr_err("overwrote kernel text\n"); > + /* > + * There are window conditions where the hijacker cpu manages to > + * write to the patch site but the site gets overwritten again by > + * the patching cpu. We still consider that a "successful" hijack > + * since the hijacker cpu did not fault on the write. > + */ > + pr_err("FAIL: wrote to another cpu's patching area\n"); > + } else { > + kthread_stop(patching_kthrd); > + } > + > +out: > + /* Restore the original insn for any future lkdtm tests */ > + patch_instruction(patch_site, original_insn); > +} > + > +#else > + > +void lkdtm_HIJACK_PATCH(void) > +{ > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC)) > + pr_err("XFAIL: this test is powerpc-only\n"); > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX)) > + pr_err("XFAIL: this test requires CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX\n"); > +} > + > +#endif /* CONFIG_PPC && CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX */ > + > void __init lkdtm_perms_init(void) > { > /* Make sure we can write to __ro_after_init values during __init */ >
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.