[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52E611EB.8030001@nod.at>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:59:39 +0100
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Cong Ding <dinggnu@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mathias Krause <minipli@...glemail.com>,
Michael Davidson <md@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/kaslr for v3.14
Am 27.01.2014 08:38, schrieb Ingo Molnar:
>
> * H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>
>> On 01/26/2014 10:49 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No, because that information is available to user space unless we panic.
>>>
>>> Didn't you mean non-root?
>>> I thought one has to set dmesg_restrict anyways if kASLR is used.
>>>
>>> And isn't the offset available to perf too?
>>> Of course only for root, but still user space.
>>>
>>
>> For certain system security levels one want to protect even from a
>> rogue root. In those cases, leaking that information via dmesg and
>> perf isn't going to work, either.
>>
>> With lower security settings, by all means...
>
> The 'no' was categorical and unconditional though, so is the right
> answer perhaps something more along the lines of:
>
> 'Yes, the random offset can be reported in an oops, as long as
> high security setups can turn off the reporting of the offset,
> in their idealistic attempt to protect the system against root.'
>
> ?
>
> I also still think that in addition to reporting the offset,
> automatically 'un-randomizing' the oopses and warnings would be useful
> as well: with a clear to recognize indicator used for every value
> unrandomized, such as capitalizing their first hexa digit.
>
> Let me show a mockup of how I think it could work:
>
> raw 64-bit original:
>
> [ 246.085174] <IRQ> [<ffffffff8264fbf6>] dump_stack+0x46/0x58
> [ 246.098352] [<ffffffff82054fb6>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x46/0x50
> [ 246.104786] [<ffffffff825710d6>] dev_watchdog+0x246/0x250
> [ 246.110923] [<ffffffff82570e90>] ? dev_deactivate_queue.constprop.31+0x80/0x80
> [ 246.119097] [<ffffffff8206092a>] call_timer_fn+0x3a/0x110
> [ 246.125224] [<ffffffff8206280f>] ? update_process_times+0x6f/0x80
>
> 64-bit un-randomized:
>
> [ 246.085174] <IRQ> [<FFFFFFFF8164fbf6>] dump_stack+0x46/0x58
> [ 246.091633] [<FFFFFFFF81054ecc>] warn_slowpath_common+0x8c/0xc0
> [ 246.098352] [<FFFFFFFF81054fb6>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x46/0x50
> [ 246.104786] [<FFFFFFFF815710d6>] dev_watchdog+0x246/0x250
> [ 246.110923] [<FFFFFFFF81570e90>] ? dev_deactivate_queue.constprop.31+0x80/0x80
> [ 246.119097] [<FFFFFFFF8106092a>] call_timer_fn+0x3a/0x110
> [ 246.125224] [<FFFFFFFF8106280f>] ? update_process_times+0x6f/0x80
>
> Note how the hex values of unrandomized kernel text start with capital
> letters, and how their values match up System.map and vmlinux symbol
> values.
>
> raw 32-bit randomized:
>
> [ 39.054098] [<c20ded55>] ? __jump_label_update+0x45/0x60
> [ 39.064852] [<c2057aa2>] ? queue_work_on+0x32/0x70
> [ 39.074570] [<c20085b1>] ? mark_tsc_unstable+0x21/0x60
> [ 39.084980] [<c2f03af6>] ? tsc_init+0x326/0x344
> [ 39.094175] [<c2eff9c5>] ? start_kernel+0x2c7/0x356
>
> 32-bit un-randomized:
>
> [ 39.054098] [<C10ded55>] ? __jump_label_update+0x45/0x60
> [ 39.064852] [<C1057aa2>] ? queue_work_on+0x32/0x70
> [ 39.074570] [<C10085b1>] ? mark_tsc_unstable+0x21/0x60
> [ 39.084980] [<C1f03af6>] ? tsc_init+0x326/0x344
> [ 39.094175] [<C1eff9c5>] ? start_kernel+0x2c7/0x356
>
> This looks eminently useful to me, I could plug those hexa values into
> gdb straight away to look up a symbol instead of having to subtract
> the random offset first.
>
> This would do 99% of the unrandomizing job for the user/developer (and
> not the least, for tooling), without obfuscating oopses as it would be
> clear on which values the unrandomizing was performed, without losing
> information.
I like this idea.
Hopefully nothing breaks if the mix lower and upper case hex numbers. =)
If so we could still inject a line like
"[<fffffffffffffffe>] __unrandomize_addr+0x0/0x0" into the trace
to mark a an un-randomized one.
Or a <UN-RANDOM> like <IRQ> on x86_64...
Thanks,
//richard
--
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