|
Message-ID: <8f938da2-a10d-ca15-56f0-70315c678771@linux.microsoft.com> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:59:04 -0500 From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@...ux.microsoft.com> To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> Cc: Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] [RFC] Implement Trampoline File Descriptor On 8/3/20 3:23 AM, David Laight wrote: > From: Madhavan T. Venkataraman >> Sent: 02 August 2020 19:55 >> To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> >> Cc: Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>; Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>; >> linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>; Linux FS Devel <linux- >> fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>; linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>; LKML <linux- >> kernel@...r.kernel.org>; LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>; Oleg Nesterov >> <oleg@...hat.com>; X86 ML <x86@...nel.org> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] [RFC] Implement Trampoline File Descriptor >> >> More responses inline.. >> >> On 7/28/20 12:31 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>>> On Jul 28, 2020, at 6:11 AM, madvenka@...ux.microsoft.com wrote: >>>> >>>> From: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@...ux.microsoft.com> >>>> >>> 2. Use existing kernel functionality. Raise a signal, modify the >>> state, and return from the signal. This is very flexible and may not >>> be all that much slower than trampfd. >> Let me understand this. You are saying that the trampoline code >> would raise a signal and, in the signal handler, set up the context >> so that when the signal handler returns, we end up in the target >> function with the context correctly set up. And, this trampoline code >> can be generated statically at build time so that there are no >> security issues using it. >> >> Have I understood your suggestion correctly? > I was thinking that you'd just let the 'not executable' page fault > signal happen (SIGSEGV?) when the code jumps to on-stack trampoline > is executed. > > The user signal handler can then decode the faulting instruction > and, if it matches the expected on-stack trampoline, modify the > saved registers before returning from the signal. > > No kernel changes and all you need to add to the program is > an architecture-dependant signal handler. Understood. Madhavan
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.