linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm/usercopy: Check kmap addresses properly

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 10 May 2022 15:01:22 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm/usercopy: Check kmap addresses properly

On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 08:37:42PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 23:15:27 +0000 "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> > If you are copying to an address in the kmap region, you may not copy
> > across a page boundary,
> 
> In the source, the destination or in both, and why may we not?

This depends on direction. For copying to userspace, the source (kmap).
For copying from userspace, the destination (kmap).

> > no matter what the size of the underlying
> > allocation.  You can't kmap() a slab page because slab pages always
> > come from low memory.

As in it'll be processed as a slab page instead of kmap by the usercopy
checks?

-- 
Kees Cook