linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] ARM: probes: check stack operation when decoding

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: <1409302042.1247.27.camel@computer5.home>
Date:	Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:47:22 +0100
From:	"Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@...aro.org>
To:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>,
	"David A. Long" <dave.long@...aro.org>,
	Taras Kondratiuk <taras.kondratiuk@...aro.org>,
	Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>,
	Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
	Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Pei Feiyue <peifeiyue@...wei.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] ARM: probes: check stack operation when decoding

On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 11:24 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:20:21AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 06:51:15PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > (2014/08/27 22:02), Wang Nan wrote:
> > > > This patch improves arm instruction decoder, allows it check whether an
> > > > instruction is a stack store operation. This information is important
> > > > for kprobe optimization.
> > > > 
> > > > For normal str instruction, this patch add a series of _SP_STACK
> > > > register indicator in the decoder to test the base and offset register
> > > > in ldr <Rt>, [<Rn>, <Rm>] against sp.
> > > > 
> > > > For stm instruction, it check sp register in instruction specific
> > > > decoder.
> > > 
> > > OK, reviewed. but since I'm not so sure about arm32 ISA,
> > > I need help from ARM32 maintainer to ack this.
> > 
> > What you actually need is an ack from the ARM kprobes people who
> > understand this code.  That would be much more meaningful than my
> > ack.  They're already on the Cc list.
> 
> Tixy, can you take a look please?

I'll take an in depth look on Monday as I'm currently on holiday, so for
now just some brief and possibly not well thought out comments...

- If the intent is to not optimise stack push operations, then this
actually excludes the main use of kprobes which I believe is to insert
probes at the start of functions (there's even a specific jprobes API
for that) this is because functions usually start by saving registers on
the stack.

- Crowbarring in special case testing for stack operations looks a bit
inelegant and not a sustainable way of doing this, what about the next
special case we need? However, stack push operations _are_ a general
special cases for instruction emulation so perhaps that's OK, and leads
me to...

- The current 'unoptimised' kprobes implementation allows for pushing on
the stack (see __und_svc and the unused (?) jprobe_return) but this is
just aimed at stm instructions, not things like "str r0, [sp, -imm]!"
that might be used to simultaneously save a register and reserve an
arbitrary amount of stack space. Probing such instructions could lead to
the kprobes code trashing the kernel stack.

-- 
Tixy


--
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/