linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] drivers: hwspinlock: add generic framework

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: <20101126104548.GG9310@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Fri, 26 Nov 2010 10:45:48 +0000
From:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
Cc:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Hari Kanigeri <h-kanigeri2@...com>, Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>,
	Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@...com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] drivers: hwspinlock: add generic framework

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 12:16:39PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:53:10AM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> >> >> +int __hwspin_trylock(struct hwspinlock *hwlock, int mode, unsigned long *flags)
> >> >> +{
> >> >> +     int ret;
> >> >> +
> >> >> +     if (unlikely(!hwlock)) {
> >> >> +             pr_err("invalid hwlock\n");
> >> >
> >> > These kind of errors can get very spammy for buggy drivers.
> >>
> >> Yeah, but that's the purpose - I want to catch such egregious drivers
> >> who try to crash the kernel.
> >
> > That can be better - because you get a backtrace, and it causes people
> > to report the problem rather than just ignore it.  It may also prevent
> > the driver author releasing his code (as it won't work on their
> > initial testing.)
> >
> ...
> >
> > If it's "extremely buggy behaviour" then the drivers deserve to crash.
> > Such stuff should cause them not to get out the door.  A simple printk
> > with an error return can just be ignored.
> 
> I like this approach too, but recently we had a few privilege
> escalation exploits which involved NULL dereference kernel bugs
> (process context mapped address 0 despite a positive mmap_min_addr).

That's not a concern on ARM.  The prevention of having a user page mapped
at virtual address 0 does not rely on mmap_min_addr - in fact, we can't
use this as it's tuneable to enforce this requirement.

It's highly illegal on ARM - as ARM CPUs without vector remap place the
hardware vectors at virtual address 0, and as such allowing the user to
map a page there will take the system down.  So we have this code in the
mmap path:

#define arch_mmap_check(addr, len, flags) \
        (((flags) & MAP_FIXED && (addr) < FIRST_USER_ADDRESS) ? -EINVAL : 0)

which prevents any attempt what so ever, irrespective of the mmap_min_addr
setting, to create a userspace induced mapping at address 0.
--
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/