linux-kernel - Re: [CRIU] [PATCH] Add VDSO time function support for x86 32-bit kernel

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: <50CBBC58.4080307@zytor.com>
Date:	Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:55:04 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
CC:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, aarcange@...hat.com,
	ak@...ux.intel.com, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, criu@...nvz.org, mingo@...hat.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [CRIU] [PATCH] Add VDSO time function support for x86 32-bit
 kernel

On 12/14/2012 03:48 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> On 12/14/2012 02:48 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 12/14/2012 02:43 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 02:27:08PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> This won't help in case of scenario you've been pointing in
>>> previous email (where c/r happens in a middle of vdso),
>>> would it? Because we still need somehow to be sure we're not
>>> checkpointing in a middle of signal handler which will return
>>> to some vdso place.
>> It is okay if and only if those vdso places never change... which I
>> think is doable if they only contain trival system call wrappers, i.e.
>> something like:
>>
>>     movl $__SYS_gettimeofday, %eax
>>     syscall
>>     ret
> 
> Though doesn't this make it easier for exploits (somewhat undoing ASLR)?
> I know Andi always wanted to avoid having syscall instructions at a
> fixed location for the old vsyscall code (though I know we had it
> none-the-less for awhile).   But maybe I'm confusing issues here?
> 

They aren't in fixed addresses across processes... the vdso location can
still be randomized.  It just has to be the same across the
checkpoint/restart operation, just like all the other instructions.

	-hpa


--
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/