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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56D75C8D.90800@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 2 Mar 2016 13:35:09 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86: Make sure verify_cpu has a good stack

On 03/02/16 11:50, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:39:05AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Well, we definitely should use %rip-relative addressing if we can.
> 
> Right you are.
> 
>> However, even so I believe this breaks if the kernel is loaded anywhere
>> but its default load address.  I think we need to do something like:
>>
>> 	movq	stack_start(%rip), %rax
>> 	leaq	__START_KERNEL_map(%rip), %rdx
>> 	subq	%rdx, %rax
>> 	movq	%rax, %rsp
>>
>> The use of temporary registers avoids clobbering a valid stack pointer
>> for even a single instruction if we are given one.
> 
> Yeah, we should be prudent and make this as sturdy as possible. I did this:
> 
> CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START=0x100beef
> 
> and it aligned startup_64 up to ffffffff82000000. It seems to boot fine
> in kvm. But better safe than sorry.
> 

You're not actually testing anything as the real issue is what happens
with a relocating bootloader.  That's okay; I think we can be pretty
sure the above works by inspection.

	-hpa


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ