[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrUqkRx5yDgbKJSD61E-xkjOYoOL+yrZdWxG-hb8j-mQcQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 16:54:32 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Julien Tinnes <jln@...gle.com>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Meredydd Luff <meredydd@...atehouse.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: General flags to turn things off (getrandom, pid lookup, etc)
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:43 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 07/25/2014 11:30 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> - 32-bit GDT code segments [huge attack surface]
>> - 64-bit GDT code segments [probably pointless]
>
> I presume you mean s/GDT/LDT/.
>
> We already don't allow 64-bit LDT code segments. Also, it is unclear to
> me how 32-bit LDT segments have a huge attack surface, given that there
> will realistically always be a 32-bit *GDT* segment present.
I really did mean GDT :) Setting the 32-bit code segment to "not
present" (and using seccomp to block modify_ldt) prevents any attempt
to exploit bugs in the sysenter and cstar code. It also might prevent
exploiting CPU bugs, although I've never heard of a relevant CPU bug
in this area.
If I actually tried to implement this (which wouldn't be part of the
initial implementation), I'd split out the unusual things in
__switch_to and friends to a slow path that's only used if weird
settings are present (e.g. this, TSC restrictions, etc). But
twiddling the present bit on a GDT entry is very fast, I assume --
it's just memory, and I don't think that any flush is needed.
Also, if I implement this, I will curse Xen. I might even go so far
as to disable the feature entirely if there's a paravirt GDT.
Hmm. A separate flag to turn int $0x80 into GPF could have some value, too.
--Andy
--
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