linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86-64: espfix for 64-bit mode *PROTOTYPE*

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]

Date:	Mon, 28 Apr 2014 16:05:41 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Andrew Lutomirski <amluto@...il.com>, comex <comexk@...il.com>
CC:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
	Alexandre Julliard <julliard@...ehq.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: espfix for 64-bit mode *PROTOTYPE*

On 04/23/2014 09:53 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> 
> This particular vector hurts: you can safely keep trying until it works.
> 
> This just gave me an evil idea: what if we make the whole espfix area
> read-only?  This has some weird effects.  To switch to the espfix
> stack, you have to write to an alias.  That's a little strange but
> harmless and barely complicates the implementation.  If the iret
> faults, though, I think the result will be a #DF.  This may actually
> be a good thing: if the #DF handler detects that the cause was a bad
> espfix iret, it could just return directly to bad_iret or send the
> signal itself the same way that do_stack_segment does.  This could
> even be written in C :)
> 
> Peter, is this idea completely nuts?  The only exceptions that can
> happen there are NMI, MCE, #DB, #SS, and #GP.  The first four use IST,
> so they won't double-fault.
> 

So I tried writing this bit up, but it fails in some rather spectacular
ways.  Furthermore, I have been unable to debug it under Qemu, because
breakpoints don't work right (common Qemu problem, sadly.)

The kernel code is at:

https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/hpa/espfix64.git/

There are two tests:

git://git.zytor.com/users/hpa/test16/test16.git, build it, and run
./run16 test/hello.elf
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/ldttest.c

The former will exercise the irq_return_ldt path, but not the fault
path; the latter will exercise the fault path, but doesn't actually use
a 16-bit segment.

Under the 3.14 stock kernel, the former should die with SIGBUS and the
latter should pass.

	-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/