linux-kernel - Re: bugs in page colouring code

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 14 Jun 2012 08:57:50 -0400
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
CC:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, sjhill@...s.com, ralf@...ux-mips.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: bugs in page colouring code

On 06/14/2012 06:36 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 03:29:36PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:

>> For one, there are separate kernel boot arguments to control whether
>> 32 and 64 bit processes need to have their addresses aligned for
>> page colouring.
>>
>> Do we really need that?
>
> Yes.

What do we need it for?

I can see wanting a big knob to disable page colouring
globally for both 32 and 64 bit processes, but why do
we need to control it separately?

I am not too keen on x86 keeping a slightly changed
private copy of arch_align_addr :)

> Mind you, this is only enabled on AMD F15h - all other x86 simply can't
> tweak it without code change.
>
>> Would it be a problem if I discarded that code, in order to get to one
>> common cache colouring implementation?
>
> Sorry, but, we'd like to keep it in.

What is it used for?

>> Secondly, MAP_FIXED never checks for page colouring alignment. I
>> assume the cache aliasing on AMD Bulldozer is merely a performance
>> issue, and we can simply ignore page colouring for MAP_FIXED?
>
> Right, AFAICR, MAP_FIXED is not generally used for shared libs (correct
> me if I'm wrong here, my memory is very fuzzy about it) and since we see
> the perf issue with shared libs, this was fine.

Try stracing /bin/mount one of these days. A whole bunch
of libraries are mapped with MAP_FIXED :)

However, I expect that on x86 many applications expect
MAP_FIXED to just work, and enforcing that would be
more trouble than it's worth.

>> That will be easy to get right in an architecture-independent
>> implementation.
>>
>>
>> A third issue is this:
>>
>>          if (!(current->flags&  PF_RANDOMIZE))
>>                  return addr;
>>
>> Do we really want to skip page colouring merely because the
>> application does not have PF_RANDOMIZE set?  What is this
>> conditional supposed to do?
>
> Linus said that without this we are probably breaking old userspace
> which can't stomach ASLR so we had to respect such userspace which
> clears that flag.

I wonder if that is true, since those userspace programs
probably run fine on ARM, MIPS and other architectures...

-- 
All rights reversed
--
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/