linux-kernel - Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [RFC v2][PATCH 04/11] x86: Implement __arch_rare_write

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:   Fri, 7 Apr 2017 17:22:39 +0100
From:   Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:     Mathias Krause <minipli@...glemail.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" 
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Hoeun Ryu <hoeun.ryu@...il.com>,
        PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu>,
        Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [RFC v2][PATCH 04/11] x86: Implement
 __arch_rare_write_begin/unmap()

On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 09:14:29AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I think we're approaching this all wrong, actually.  The fact that x86
> has this CR0.WP thing is arguably a historical accident, and the fact
> that PaX uses it doesn't mean that PaX is doing it the best way for
> upstream Linux.
> 
> Why don't we start at the other end and do a generic non-arch-specific
> implementation: set up an mm_struct that contains an RW alias of the
> relevant parts of rodata and use use_mm to access it.  (That is,
> get_fs() to back up the old fs, set_fs(USER_DS),
> use_mm(&rare_write_mm), do the write using copy_to_user, undo
> everything.)

FWIW, I completely agree with this approach.

That's largely the approach arm64 would have to take regardless (as per
Hoeun's patches), and having a consistent common implementation would be
desireable.

There are a couple of other complications to handle (e.g. a perf
interrupt coming in and trying to read from the mapping), but I think we
can handle that generically.

Thanks,
Mark.