linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86-64: Fix %cs value in convert_from

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]

Message-ID: <AANLkTikcZ1sWe4+j+Q6nw7ZNy-fi-=ojdvnZP5+N+QQY@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 30 Aug 2010 09:44:48 +0300
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To:	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
Cc:	hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] x86-64: Fix %cs value in convert_from_fxsr()

On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com> wrote:
>>> While %ds still contains the userspace selector, %cs is KERNEL_CS
>>> at this point.  Always get %cs from pt_regs.
>>>
>>> It actually is possible to get the correct segments for compat tasks,
>>> but that involves using the [f]xsave instruction without a REX.W prefix.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>

On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 2:41 PM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org> wrote:
>> It might be just me but the above description doesn't explain
>> anything. What's the problem here? What is this fixing?

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 3:25 AM, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com> wrote:
> The %cs segment being reported to a compat task is flat out wrong.  It
> is getting KERNEL_CS when it should be some userspace segment.  The
> code segment may still be wrong, because the %cs in pt_regs may not
> have been the segment where the instruction that flagged the exception
> executed from.  That could be fixed by using fxsave without a REX.W
> prefix when saving the state of compat tasks, which would save the
> segment and 32-bit offset instead of the 64-bit offset for the code
> and data pointers.  This is such a corner case that it probably isn't
> worth putting much effort into fixing unless someone demonstrates a
> real need for it.

I sort of was able to deduce most of that from the original
description. However, I still don't quite understand what the problem
causes. Just a wrong cs reported to a signal handler or something
else?
--
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/