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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 21:32:55 +0000 From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> To: 'Sami Tolvanen' <samitolvanen@...gle.com> CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, "Nick Desaulniers" <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, Joao Moreira <joao@...rdrivepizza.com>, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>, "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>, "linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "llvm@...ts.linux.dev" <llvm@...ts.linux.dev> Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v2 20/21] x86: Add support for CONFIG_CFI_CLANG From: Sami Tolvanen > Sent: 16 May 2022 17:39 > > On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 1:32 AM David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com> wrote: > > > > From: Sami Tolvanen > > > Sent: 13 May 2022 21:22 > > > > > > With CONFIG_CFI_CLANG, the compiler injects a type preamble > > > immediately before each function and a check to validate the target > > > function type before indirect calls: > > > > > > ; type preamble > > > __cfi_function: > > > int3 > > > int3 > > > mov <id>, %eax > > > > Interesting - since this code can't be executed there is no > > point adding an instruction 'prefix' to the 32bit constant. > > The reason to embed the type into an instruction is to avoid the need > to special case objtool's instruction decoder. > > > > int3 > > > int3 > > > function: > > > ... > > > ; indirect call check > > > cmpl <id>, -6(%r11) > > > je .Ltmp1 > > > ud2 > > > .Ltmp1: > > > call __x86_indirect_thunk_r11 > > > > > > Define the __CFI_TYPE helper macro for manual type annotations in > > > assembly code, add error handling for the CFI ud2 traps, and allow > > > CONFIG_CFI_CLANG to be selected on x86_64. > > > > > ... > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * The compiler generates the following instruction sequence > > > + * for indirect call checks: > > > + * > > > + * cmpl <id>, -6(%reg) ; 7 bytes > > > > If the <id> is between -128 and 127 then an 8bit constant > > (sign extended) might be used. > > Possibly the compiler forces the assembler to generate the > > long form. > > > > There could also be a REX prefix. > > That will break any code that tries to use %reg. > > The compiler always generates this specific instruction sequence. Yes, but there are several ways to encode 'cmpl imm,-6(reg)'. Firstly you can use '81 /7 imm32' or '83 /7 imm8' where imm8 is sign extended. (the /7 1/7/index_reg for a signed 8 bit offset). But that only works for the original 32bit registers. For the 64bit r8 to r15 an extra REX prefix is required. That makes the instruction 8 bytes (if it needs a full 32bit immediate). So if the register is %r11 there is an extra REX byte. If the <id> is a hash and happens to be between -128 and 127 then there are three less bytes. So decoding from regs->ip - 0 isn't always going to give you the start of the instruction. > > > > + * je .Ltmp1 ; 2 bytes > > > + * ud2 ; <- addr > > > + * .Ltmp1: > > > + * > > > + * Both the type and the target address can be decoded from the > > > + * cmpl instruction. > > > + */ > > > + if (copy_from_kernel_nofault(buffer, (void *)regs->ip - 9, MAX_INSN_SIZE)) > > > + return; > > > + if (insn_decode_kernel(&insn, buffer)) > > > + return; > > > + if (insn.opcode.value != 0x81 || X86_MODRM_REG(insn.modrm.value) != 7) > > > + return; > > > > Since you are looking for a very specific opcode why bother > > calling insn_decode_kernel() - just check for the required (masked) > > byte values. > > Because I need to decode both the immediate value and the register > from that instruction. > > > > + > > > + *type = insn.immediate.value; > > > + > > > + offset = insn_get_modrm_rm_off(&insn, regs); > > > > Given the expected instruction, isn't that -6 ?? > > No, this is the register offset. Hmmm.... strange function name... > > > > + if (offset < 0) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + *target = *(unsigned long *)((void *)regs + offset); > > > > WTF is that calculating?? > > It's reading the register value from pt_regs. > > Sami David - Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists