[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrVG4v0xHbM4SKoEa+6hrmQ8hUPQ0fX=DKgJbc1MwRq-Rg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 18:02:57 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/17] x86: simplify iret stack handling on SYSCALL64 fastpath
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 2:21 AM, Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 08/11/2014 10:06 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> On 08/11/2014 12:42 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:00 AM, Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 08/09/2014 12:59 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>>>>> + * When returning through fast path, userspace sees rcx = return address,
>>>>>>> + * r11 = rflags. When returning through iret (e.g. if audit is active),
>>>>>>> + * these registers may contain garbage.
>>>>>>> + * For ptrace we manage to avoid that: when we hit slow path on entry,
>>>>>>> + * we do save rcx and r11 in pt_regs, so ptrace on exit also sees them.
>>>>>>> + * If slow path is entered only on exit, there will be garbage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't like this. At least the current code puts something
>>>>>> deterministic in there (-1) for the slow path, even though it's wrong
>>>>>> and makes the slow path behave visibly differently from the fast path.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Leaking uninitialized data here is extra bad, though. Keep in mind
>>>>>> that, when a syscall entry is interrupted before fully setting up
>>>>>> pt_regs, the interrupt frame overlaps task_pt_regs, so it's possible,
>>>>>> depending on the stack slot ordering, for a kernel secret
>>>>>> (kernel_stack?) to end up somewhere in task_pt_regs.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's easy to fix. We jump off fast path to slow path here:
>>>>>
>>>>> movl TI_flags+THREAD_INFO(%rsp,SIZEOF_PTREGS),%edx
>>>>> andl %edi,%edx
>>>>> jnz sysret_careful
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the only use of "sysret_careful" label.
>>>>> Therefore, there we don't need to think about any other scenarios
>>>>> besides "we are returning from syscall here".
>>>>
>>>> I may be missing something here (on vacation, not really testing
>>>> things, no big monitor, etc), but how is this compatible with things
>>>> like rt_sigreturn? rt_sigreturn is call from the fastpath, via a
>>>> stub, and it returns through int_ret_from_syscall. The C part needs
>>>> to modify all the regs, and those regs need to stick, so fixing up rcx
>>>> and r11 after rt_sigreturn can't work.
>>>
>>> Code at "sysret_careful" label is only reachable
>>> on fast path return.
>>> We don't go down this code path after rt_sigreturn.
>>> stub_rt_sigreturn manually steers into iret code path instead:
>>>
>>> ENTRY(stub_rt_sigreturn)
>>> CFI_STARTPROC
>>> addq $8, %rsp
>>> DEFAULT_FRAME 0
>>> SAVE_EXTRA_REGS
>>> STORE_IRET_FRAME_CS_SS
>>> call sys_rt_sigreturn
>>> movq %rax,RAX(%rsp)
>>> RESTORE_EXTRA_REGS
>>> jmp int_ret_from_sys_call <==== NOTE THIS
>>>
>>> So, we don't do any rcx/r11 fixups after sys_rt_sigreturn.
>>
>> Oh, right. rt_sigreturn overwrites all regs, so it doesn't need a
>> fixup in advance.
>>
>> That still leaves fork and everything that calls ptrace_event, though.
>
> I think I have it covered:
>
> [v]fork and clone have fully populated pt_regs.
>
> Syscall entry/exit ptrace stops are on slow path and therefore
> also have fully populated pt_regs.
Heh. I hope so, but CVE-2014-4699 was an exception to that rule...
Anyway, I'll see if I can beef up my test cases that are relevant to this stuff.
--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