linux-hardening - Re: [RFC PATCH 01/11] x86: kernel FineIBT

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 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:   Thu, 5 May 2022 09:36:22 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
Cc:     Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Joao Moreira <joao@...rdrivepizza.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, hjl.tools@...il.com,
        alyssa.milburn@...ux.intel.com,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        gabriel.gomes@...ux.intel.com, rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/11] x86: kernel FineIBT

On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 05:28:57PM -0700, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 11:17 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > __cfi_\sym:                                     __cfi_\sym:
> >                                                         int3; int3                              # 2
> >         endbr                   # 4                     mov     \hash, %eax                     # 5
> >         call    __fineibt_\hash # 5                     int3; int3                              # 2
> > \sym:                                           \sym:
> 
> OK, that looks reasonable to me.
> 
> > It seems to preserve the properties of the last one in that direct calls
> > will already be correct and we don't need linker fixups, and objtool can
> > simply parse the preamble as regular instructions without needing
> > further help.
> 
> Wouldn't objtool still print out unreachable instruction warnings here?

Depends a bit on what kind of symbol they end up being, if they're
STT_FUNC we'll probably get the complaint that it falls through into the
next symbol, while if they're STT_NOTYPE then yes, we'll get the
unreachable thing.

So either way we need to special case the __cfi_\sym things anyway.

But that should be relatively straight forward. I think I would lean
towards making then STT_FUNC (they really are for FineIBT anyway) and
then supressing the fallthrough warning for all functions that start
with "__cfi_". This way we get an ORC entry for them and the unwinder
will be happy.