linux-hardening - [PATCH 40/82] arm64: stacktrace: Refactor intentional wrap-around test

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: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 16:27:15 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
	Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>,
	Fuad Tabba <tabba@...gle.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	"Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@...ux.microsoft.com>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
	Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 40/82] arm64: stacktrace: Refactor intentional wrap-around test

In an effort to separate intentional arithmetic wrap-around from
unexpected wrap-around, we need to refactor places that depend on this
kind of math. One of the most common code patterns of this is:

	VAR + value < VAR

Notably, this is considered "undefined behavior" for signed and pointer
types, which the kernel works around by using the -fno-strict-overflow
option in the build[1] (which used to just be -fwrapv). Regardless, we
want to get the kernel source to the position where we can meaningfully
instrument arithmetic wrap-around conditions and catch them when they
are unexpected, regardless of whether they are signed[2], unsigned[3],
or pointer[4] types.

Refactor open-coded wrap-around addition test to use add_would_overflow().
This paves the way to enabling the wrap-around sanitizers in the future.

Link: https://git.kernel.org/linus/68df3755e383e6fecf2354a67b08f92f18536594 [1]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/26 [2]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/27 [3]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/344 [4]
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>
Cc: Fuad Tabba <tabba@...gle.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@...ux.microsoft.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace/common.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace/common.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace/common.h
index f63dc654e545..6e0cb84961f8 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace/common.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace/common.h
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ static inline bool stackinfo_on_stack(const struct stack_info *info,
 	if (!info->low)
 		return false;
 
-	if (sp < info->low || sp + size < sp || sp + size > info->high)
+	if (sp < info->low || add_would_overflow(sp, size) || sp + size > info->high)
 		return false;
 
 	return true;
-- 
2.34.1