linux-kernel - Re: [GIT pull] x86 vdso updates

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: <19938.28108.250080.666938@pilspetsen.it.uu.se>
Date:	Sun, 29 May 2011 18:01:16 +0200
From:	Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>
To:	Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
Cc:	Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, x86@...nel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT pull] x86 vdso updates

Andrew Lutomirski writes:
 > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se> wrote:
 > > Ingo Molnar writes:
 > >  >
 > >  > * Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu> wrote:
 > >  >
 > >  > > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu> wrote:
 > >  > > > 3. Add int 0xcc and use it from vgettimeofday.  It will SIGSEGV if
 > >  > > > called from a user address (so it has no risk of ever becoming ABI)
 > >  > > > and it will do gettimeofday if called from the right address.  (I like
 > > ...
 > >  > > Make it a real syscall but with extra constraints.  It would have the
 > >  > > same calling convention as the syscall instruction, but it would turn
 > >  > > into SIGKILL if the calling address isn't in the VSYSCALL page
 > >
 > > This will make things difficult for user-space dynamic binary instrumentation
 > > applications, since these normally execute generated code at different
 > > addresses than the original code.
 > >
 > > Is there a safe fallback for this particular vsyscall?
 > 
 > All of the vsyscalls have vDSO versions that work like any other code.

Easiest would be if we can simply map int $0xcc with rAX==FOO to syscall or
int 0x80 with rAX==BAR.

We currently don't even know about the vDSO, it's all just user-space code
to us.

 > Alternatively, if the dynamic instrumentation code knew about
 > vsyscalls, it could just not instrument addresses in the vsyscall
 > page.

Not instrumenting code is not an option, unless we can prove that the
code in question has no relevant side-effects or unexpected control-flow.
(Where "side-effects" relate both to the integrity of the instrumentation
engine and the application-specific payload it's attaching to the code.)

 > What existing applications would get broken?

My concern is ThreadSpotter, but any user-space dynamic binary instrumentation
engine that instruments down to the raw kernel interface (syscall/sysenter/int
instructions) would have a problem with syscalls that only work at specific
addresses.

Anyway, if I can map that vsyscall to a plain proper syscall, then I'm OK.

/Mikael
--
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/