linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH 5/6] driver core: Add __alloc

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:   Thu, 2 Feb 2023 11:49:42 -0800
From:   Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
        Yongqin Liu <yongqin.liu@...aro.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
        Michael Kelley <mikelley@...rosoft.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Won Chung <wonchung@...gle.com>,
        David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
        Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
        llvm@...ts.linux.dev, Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] driver core: Add __alloc_size hint to devm allocators

On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 11:31 AM Nick Desaulniers
<ndesaulniers@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 11:20 AM Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 at 20:10, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 10:56:29AM -0800, John Stultz wrote:
> > > > That said, making sense of the error message isn't completely trivial
> > > > either. I've been seeing a few cases recently of some of the new
> > > > compiler tooling (I pinged you earlier on a CFI one) causing errors
> > > > that developers aren't really sure how to address.  I know sometimes
> > > > it's not easy to surface the errors with context to what was wrong,
> > > > but at the risk of intense bike shedding, is there some way to provide
> > > > something like "Likely array bounds error" instead of just "BRK
> > > > handler: Fatal exception"?
> > >
> > > Yeah, this is a result of the size trade-off that resulted in config
> > > CONFIG_UBSAN_TRAP -- there ends up being no message about what went
> > > wrong. I'd really like to have cleaner handling of this -- perhaps what
> > > was done for KCFI could be applied to UBSAN as well, though this is an
> > > area I don't know well myself. (i.e. encoding "this was a UBSAN trap"
> > > in the trap itself.)
> > >
> > > Sami or Ard, is this something that could be improved for arm64?
> > >
> >
> > -ENOCONTEXT, so I am going to assume this is about runtime
> > instrumentation that needs some kind of 'panic' function which it will
> > invoke if some condition is met that should never occur?
> >
> > We already use brk with different immediate values in the opcode, so
> > the arch layer already has what we need. Is this a limitation in the
> > compiler, perhaps, where it always emits the same brk opcode?
>
> Yeah, we'd need to update both the compiler to produce the encoding,
> and the kernel to recognize the encoding and do something special.

A quick look at Clang's source code suggests that Intrinsic::ubsantrap
already accepts the handler ID (from the SanitizerHandler enum) as an
argument and the arm64 LLVM back-end appears to encode the value as an
immediate for the brk instruction. I didn't confirm that this actually
works, but perhaps we just need to teach the kernel about the possible
values?

Sami