linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 14/26] x86/insn-eval: Indicate a 32-bit displacement if ModRM.mod is 0 and ModRM.rm is 5

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, 7 Jun 2017 15:15:50 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To:     Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
        Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Huang Rui <ray.huang@....com>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>,
        Alexandre Julliard <julliard@...ehq.org>,
        Stas Sergeev <stsp@...t.ru>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-msdos@...r.kernel.org, wine-devel@...ehq.org,
        Adam Buchbinder <adam.buchbinder@...il.com>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>,
        Qiaowei Ren <qiaowei.ren@...el.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 14/26] x86/insn-eval: Indicate a 32-bit displacement
 if ModRM.mod is 0 and ModRM.rm is 5

On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 11:17:12AM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> Section 2.2.1.3 of the Intel 64 and IA-32 Architectures Software
> Developer's Manual volume 2A states that when ModRM.mod is zero and
> ModRM.rm is 101b, a 32-bit displacement follows the ModRM byte. This means
> that none of the registers are used in the computation of the effective
> address. A return value of -EDOM signals callers that they should not use
> the value of registers when computing the effective address for the
> instruction.
> 
> In IA-32e 64-bit mode (long mode), the effective address is given by the
> 32-bit displacement plus the value of RIP of the next instruction.
> In IA-32e compatibility mode (protected mode), only the displacement is
> used.
> 
> The instruction decoder takes care of obtaining the displacement.

...

> diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/insn-eval.c b/arch/x86/lib/insn-eval.c
> index 693e5a8..4f600de 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/lib/insn-eval.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/lib/insn-eval.c
> @@ -379,6 +379,12 @@ static int get_reg_offset(struct insn *insn, struct pt_regs *regs,
>  	switch (type) {
>  	case REG_TYPE_RM:
>  		regno = X86_MODRM_RM(insn->modrm.value);


<---- newline here.

> +		/*
> +		 * ModRM.mod == 0 and ModRM.rm == 5 means a 32-bit displacement
> +		 * follows the ModRM byte.
> +		 */
> +		if (!X86_MODRM_MOD(insn->modrm.value) && regno == 5)
> +			return -EDOM;
>  		if (X86_REX_B(insn->rex_prefix.value))
>  			regno += 8;
>  		break;
> @@ -730,9 +736,21 @@ void __user *insn_get_addr_ref(struct insn *insn, struct pt_regs *regs)
>  			eff_addr = base + indx * (1 << X86_SIB_SCALE(sib));
>  		} else {
>  			addr_offset = get_reg_offset(insn, regs, REG_TYPE_RM);
> -			if (addr_offset < 0)

ditto.

> +			/*
> +			 * -EDOM means that we must ignore the address_offset.
> +			 * In such a case, in 64-bit mode the effective address
> +			 * relative to the RIP of the following instruction.
> +			 */
> +			if (addr_offset == -EDOM) {
> +				eff_addr = 0;
> +				if (user_64bit_mode(regs))
> +					eff_addr = (long)regs->ip +
> +						   insn->length;

Let that line stick out and write it balanced:

                        if (addr_offset == -EDOM) {
                                if (user_64bit_mode(regs))
                                        eff_addr = (long)regs->ip + insn->length;
                                else
                                        eff_addr = 0;

should be easier parseable this way.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--