linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] x86: Make sure verify

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Wed, 2 Mar 2016 13:35:09 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86: Make sure verify_cpu has a good stack

On 03/02/16 11:50, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:39:05AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Well, we definitely should use %rip-relative addressing if we can.
> 
> Right you are.
> 
>> However, even so I believe this breaks if the kernel is loaded anywhere
>> but its default load address.  I think we need to do something like:
>>
>> 	movq	stack_start(%rip), %rax
>> 	leaq	__START_KERNEL_map(%rip), %rdx
>> 	subq	%rdx, %rax
>> 	movq	%rax, %rsp
>>
>> The use of temporary registers avoids clobbering a valid stack pointer
>> for even a single instruction if we are given one.
> 
> Yeah, we should be prudent and make this as sturdy as possible. I did this:
> 
> CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START=0x100beef
> 
> and it aligned startup_64 up to ffffffff82000000. It seems to boot fine
> in kvm. But better safe than sorry.
> 

You're not actually testing anything as the real issue is what happens
with a relocating bootloader.  That's okay; I think we can be pretty
sure the above works by inspection.

	-hpa