linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/3] x86: modify_ldt improvement, test, and config option

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 29 Jul 2015 23:11:41 +0100
From:	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	"security@...nel.org" <security@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/3] x86: modify_ldt improvement, test, and
 config option

On 29/07/2015 23:05, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Andrew Cooper
> <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com> wrote:
>> On 29/07/2015 22:26, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Boris Ostrovsky
>>> <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com> wrote:
>>>> On 07/29/2015 03:03 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>> On 29/07/15 15:43, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>>>>> FYI, I have got a repro now and am investigating.
>>>>> Good and bad news.  This bug has nothing to do with LDTs themselves.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have worked out what is going on, but this:
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c
>>>>> index 5abeaac..7e1a82e 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c
>>>>> @@ -493,6 +493,7 @@ static void set_aliased_prot(void *v, pgprot_t prot)
>>>>>            pte = pfn_pte(pfn, prot);
>>>>>   +       (void)*(volatile int*)v;
>>>>>          if (HYPERVISOR_update_va_mapping((unsigned long)v, pte, 0)) {
>>>>>                  pr_err("set_aliased_prot va update failed w/ lazy mode
>>>>> %u\n", paravirt_get_lazy_mode());
>>>>>                  BUG();
>>>>>
>>>>> Is perhaps not the fix we are looking for, and every use of
>>>>> HYPERVISOR_update_va_mapping() is susceptible to the same problem.
>>>> I think in most cases we know that page is mapped so hopefully this is the
>>>> only site that we need to be careful about.
>>> Is there any chance we can get some kind of quick-and-dirty fix that
>>> can go to x86/urgent in the next few days even if a clean fix isn't
>>> available yet?
>> Quick and dirty?
>>
>> Reading from v is the most obvious and quick way, for areas where we are
>> certain v exists, is kernel memory and is expected to have a backing
>> page.  I don't know offhand how many of current
>> HYPERVISOR_update_va_mapping() callsites this applies to.
> __get_user((char *)v, tmp), perhaps, unless there's something better
> in the wings.  Keep in mind that we need this for -stable, and it's
> likely to get backported quite quickly due to CVE-2015-5157.

Hmm - something like that tucked inside HYPERVISOR_update_va_mapping()
would probably work, and certainly be minimal hassle for -stable.

Altering the hypercall used is certainly not something to backport, nor
are we sure it is a viable fix at this time.

~Andrew
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/