[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110524210233.GI27634@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 23:02:33 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>
Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
davej@...hat.com, kees.cook@...onical.com, davem@...emloft.net,
eranian@...gle.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
adobriyan@...il.com, penberg@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, pageexec@...email.hu
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Randomize kernel base address on boot
* Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com> wrote:
> This introduces CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE, which randomizes the address at
> which the kernel is decompressed at boot as a security feature that
> deters exploit attempts relying on knowledge of the location of kernel
> internals. The default values of the kptr_restrict and dmesg_restrict
> sysctls are set to (1) when this is enabled, since hiding kernel
> pointers is necessary to preserve the secrecy of the randomized base
> address.
That was quick! :-)
> This feature also uses a fixed mapping to move the IDT (if not already
> done as a fix for the F00F bug), to avoid exposing the location of
> kernel internals relative to the original IDT. This has the additional
> security benefit of marking the new virtual address of the IDT
> read-only.
Btw., as i suggested before the IDT should be made percpu, that way we could
split out and evaluate the IDT change independently of any security
considerations, as a potential scalability improvement. Makes the decision
easier because right now moving the IDT to a 4K TLB increases the kernel's TLB
footprint a tiny bit.
> Entropy is generated using the RDRAND instruction if it is supported. If not,
> then RDTSC is used, if supported. If neither RDRAND nor RDTSC are supported,
> then no randomness is introduced. Support for the CPUID instruction is
> required to check for the availability of these two instructions.
Btw., i'd suggest to fall back not to zero but to something system specific
like RAM size or a BIOS signature such as the contents of 0xf0000 or so. This,
while clearly not random, will at least *somewhat* randomize the kernel against
remote attackers who do not know the RAM size or the system type.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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