[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091204201056.GB741@basil.fritz.box>
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 21:10:56 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"Cihula, Joseph" <joseph.cihula@...el.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
"Wang, Shane" <shane.wang@...el.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"arjan@...ux.intel.com" <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
"chrisw@...s-sol.org" <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
"jmorris@...ei.org" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"jbeulich@...ell.com" <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
"peterm@...hat.com" <peterm@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] intel_txt: add s3 userspace memory integrity
verification
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 09:53:37AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 12/04/2009 09:13 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >>>
> >>> So no, you did not audit do_suspend_lowlevel to make sure it does not
> >>> follow function pointers. Bad.
> >>
> >> We aren't aware of any code or data used by the resume path that is outside of the tboot-MAC'ed regions above--if you can point out any then we will gladly address them.
> >
> > Code coverage is not enough, you need data coverage too. If someone
> > modifies kernel data it's typically easy to subvert code as a next step.
> >
>
> The only function pointers that are invoked on the do_suspend_lowlevel
> path are some paravirt_crap pointers, but those are located inside
> kernel static data.
Was referring to panic(), like Pavel said.
It would be relatively easy to subvert something called by panic
that just jumps back to after the MAC checks.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists