| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 19:06:42 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.2 41/52] KVM: svm: unconditionally intercept #DB
On 25/11/2015 18:56, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-11-25 at 12:31 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>> On 24/11/2015 23:33, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>> 3.2.74-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>>>
>>> ------------------
>>>
>>> From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
>>>
>>> commit cbdb967af3d54993f5814f1cee0ed311a055377d upstream.
>>>
>>> This is needed to avoid the possibility that the guest triggers
>>> an infinite stream of #DB exceptions (CVE-2015-8104).
>>>
>>> VMX is not affected: because it does not save DR6 in the VMCS,
>>> it already intercepts #DB unconditionally.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
>>> [bwh: Backported to 3.2: #DB and #BP did not share a function, and there is
>>> no operation pointer referring to it, so remove update_db_intercept()
>>> entirely]
>>
>> This is wrong, you still need to check the BP intercept in the
>> (incorrectly named as of 3.2) update_db_intercept function.
>>
>> Something like:
>>
>> -static void update_db_intercept(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +static void update_bp_intercept(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> {
>> > > struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
>>
>> -> > clr_exception_intercept(svm, DB_VECTOR);
>> > > clr_exception_intercept(svm, BP_VECTOR);
>> -
>> -> > if (svm->nmi_singlestep)
>> -> > > set_exception_intercept(svm, DB_VECTOR);
>> -
>> > > if (vcpu->guest_debug & KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE) {
>> -> > > if (vcpu->guest_debug &
>> -> > > (KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP | KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_HW_BP))
>> -> > > > set_exception_intercept(svm, DB_VECTOR);
>> > > > if (vcpu->guest_debug & KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP)
>> > > > > set_exception_intercept(svm, BP_VECTOR);
>> > > } else
>> > > vcpu->guest_debug = 0;
>> }
>>
>>
>> Then the calls in db_interception and enable_nmi_window can be removed,
>> but the one in svm_guest_debug is important.
>
> Sorry about that. I now have with this version:
>
> From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
> Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 09:14:39 +0100
> Subject: KVM: svm: unconditionally intercept #DB
>
> commit cbdb967af3d54993f5814f1cee0ed311a055377d upstream.
>
> This is needed to avoid the possibility that the guest triggers
> an infinite stream of #DB exceptions (CVE-2015-8104).
>
> VMX is not affected: because it does not save DR6 in the VMCS,
> it already intercepts #DB unconditionally.
>
> Reported-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
> [bwh: Backported to 3.2, with thanks to Paolo:
> - update_db_bp_intercept() was called update_db_intercept()
> - The remaining call is in svm_guest_debug() rather than through svm_x86_ops]
> Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/svm.c | 14 +++-----------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm.c
> @@ -1015,6 +1015,7 @@ static void init_vmcb(struct vcpu_svm *s
> set_exception_intercept(svm, UD_VECTOR);
> set_exception_intercept(svm, MC_VECTOR);
> set_exception_intercept(svm, AC_VECTOR);
> + set_exception_intercept(svm, DB_VECTOR);
>
> set_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_INTR);
> set_intercept(svm, INTERCEPT_NMI);
> @@ -1550,20 +1551,13 @@ static void svm_set_segment(struct kvm_v
> mark_dirty(svm->vmcb, VMCB_SEG);
> }
>
> -static void update_db_intercept(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +static void update_bp_intercept(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> struct vcpu_svm *svm = to_svm(vcpu);
>
> - clr_exception_intercept(svm, DB_VECTOR);
> clr_exception_intercept(svm, BP_VECTOR);
>
> - if (svm->nmi_singlestep)
> - set_exception_intercept(svm, DB_VECTOR);
> -
> if (vcpu->guest_debug & KVM_GUESTDBG_ENABLE) {
> - if (vcpu->guest_debug &
> - (KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP | KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_HW_BP))
> - set_exception_intercept(svm, DB_VECTOR);
> if (vcpu->guest_debug & KVM_GUESTDBG_USE_SW_BP)
> set_exception_intercept(svm, BP_VECTOR);
> } else
> @@ -1581,7 +1575,7 @@ static void svm_guest_debug(struct kvm_v
>
> mark_dirty(svm->vmcb, VMCB_DR);
>
> - update_db_intercept(vcpu);
> + update_bp_intercept(vcpu);
> }
>
> static void new_asid(struct vcpu_svm *svm, struct svm_cpu_data *sd)
> @@ -1655,7 +1649,6 @@ static int db_interception(struct vcpu_s
> if (!(svm->vcpu.guest_debug & KVM_GUESTDBG_SINGLESTEP))
> svm->vmcb->save.rflags &=
> ~(X86_EFLAGS_TF | X86_EFLAGS_RF);
> - update_db_intercept(&svm->vcpu);
> }
>
> if (svm->vcpu.guest_debug &
> @@ -3557,7 +3550,6 @@ static void enable_nmi_window(struct kvm
> */
> svm->nmi_singlestep = true;
> svm->vmcb->save.rflags |= (X86_EFLAGS_TF | X86_EFLAGS_RF);
> - update_db_intercept(vcpu);
> }
>
> static int svm_set_tss_addr(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned int addr)
>
Thanks, this looks good.
Paolo
--
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