linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/3] x86: modify_ldt improvement, test, and config option

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: <55B8E68B.2030305@oracle.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:43:23 -0400
From:	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To:	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
CC:	"security@...nel.org" <security@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 0/3] x86: modify_ldt improvement, test,
 and config option

On 07/29/2015 10:21 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 29/07/15 06:28, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Boris Ostrovsky
>> <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com> wrote:
>>> On 07/28/2015 08:47 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>> On 29/07/2015 01:21, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Boris Ostrovsky
>>>>> <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 07/28/2015 01:07 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Andrew Cooper
>>>>>>> <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I suspect that the set_ldt(NULL, 0) call hasn't reached Xen before
>>>>>>>> xen_free_ldt() is attempting to nab back the pages which Xen still has
>>>>>>>> mapped as an LDT.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just instrumented it with yet more LSL instructions.  I'm pretty
>>>>>>> sure that set_ldt really is clearing at least LDT entry zero.
>>>>>>> Nonetheless the free_ldt call still oopses.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I added some instrumentation to the hypervisor and we definitely
>>>>>> set
>>>>>> LDT to NULL before failing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -boris
>>>>> Looking at map_ldt_shadow_page: what keeps shadow_ldt_mapcnt from
>>>>> getting incremented once on each CPU at the same time if both CPUs
>>>>> fault in the same shadow LDT page at the same time?
>>>> Nothing, but that is fine.  If a page is in use in two vcpus LDTs, it is
>>>> expected to have a type refcount of 2.
>>>>
>>>>> Similarly, what
>>>>> keeps both CPUs from calling get_page_type at the same time and
>>>>> therefore losing track of the page type reference count?
>>>> a cmpxchg() loop in the depths of __get_page_type().
>>>>
>>>>> I don't see why vmalloc or vm_unmap_aliases would have anything to do
>>>>> with this, though.
>>> So just for kicks I made lazy_max_pages() return 0 to free vmaps immediately
>>> and the problem went away.
>> As far as I can tell, this affects TLB flushes but not unmaps.  That
>> means that my patch is totally bogus -- vm_unmap_aliases() *flushed*
>> aliases but isn't involved in removing them from the page tables.
>> That must be why xen_alloc_ldt and xen_set_ldt work today.
>>
>> So what does flushing the TLB have to do with anything?  The only
>> thing I can think of is that it might force some deferred hypercalls
>> out.  I can reproduce this easily on UP, so IPIs aren't involved.
>>
>> The other odd thing is that it seems like this happens when clearing
>> the LDT and freeing the old one but not when setting the LDT and
>> freeing the old one.  This is plausibly related to the lazy mode in
>> effect at the time, but I have no evidence for that.
>>
>> Two more data points:  Putting xen_flush_mc before and after the
>> SET_LDT multicall has no effect.  Putting flush_tlb_all() in
>> xen_free_ldt doesn't help either, while vm_unmap_aliases() in the
>> exact same place does help.
> FYI, I have got a repro now and am investigating.


To simplify your test case, this is sufficient for me to trigger this:


#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/syscall.h>
#include <asm/ldt.h>


int main()
{
         int i;

         struct user_desc desc = {
                 .entry_number    = 0,
                 .base_addr       = 0,
                 .limit           = 10,
                 .seg_32bit       = 1,
                 .contents        = 2, /* Code, not conforming */
                 .read_exec_only  = 0,
                 .limit_in_pages  = 0,
                 .seg_not_present = 0,
                 .useable         = 0
};

         for (i = 0; i < 500; i++)
                 syscall(SYS_modify_ldt, 0x11, &desc, sizeof(desc));
}


Run this program in a loop --- the error is triggered (again, for me), 
when it exits.

-boris
--
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/