linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Fix kernel panic when booting with XD disabled in uEFI firmware

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]

Date:	Tue, 8 Dec 2015 12:30:06 -0800
From:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
	Kosuke Tatsukawa <tatsu@...jp.nec.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Fix kernel panic when booting with XD disabled
 in uEFI firmware

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:25:57PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Dec, at 11:10:43PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> >
>> > Thank you pointing that out.
>> >
>> > linux-4.4-rc3 booted without a problem on a real server even with XD
>> > turned off by the firmware.  I didn't notice this before because I was
>
> The aforementioned patch reenables NX.
>
>> Borislav, what do you think about stripping PAGE_NX from 'page_flags'
>> in kernel_map_pages_in_pgd() if NX isn't supported, rather than
>> returning EINVAL? At least that way EFI runtime services would still
>> work.
>
> I guess we can - I mean, I don't see what can go wrong more when
> allowing the kernel to execute even NX UEFI regions. Maybe easier
> generation of "gadgets" in the ROP sense ...
>
> On a related node, I'm very sceptical of the existence of this "noexec"
> chicken bit, if you ask me. It is a really bad idea, security-wise, to
> disable NX. Is there even a valid use case to disable NX?
>
> Because if not, I'd vote for removing that chicken bit or at least
> taining the kernel with
>
>         add_taint(TAINT_USER_MORON, ... );

If we add this for not-nx, I would like to add it for not-rodata too.

> Kees, has this NX disabling practice come up in the past, per chance... ?

I've never seen anyone actually use it. I was asked to include it out
of fear of some kind of rogue imagined CPU configuration that mixed NX
and non-NX capable CPUs in a single machine where the forced NX
re-enablement code would cause problems. As you might imagine, I'm not
aware of this case ever being an issue. ;)

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Chrome OS & Brillo Security
--
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/