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: <1471381865-25724-2-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org>
Date:	Tue, 16 Aug 2016 14:11:01 -0700
From:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
	Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] list: Split list_add() debug checking into separate function

Right now, __list_add() code is repeated either in list.h or in
list_debug.c, but only the debug checks are the different part. This
extracts the checking into a separate function and consolidates
__list_add(). Additionally this __list_add_debug() will stop list
manipulations if a corruption is detected, instead of allowing for further
corruption that may lead to even worse conditions.

This is slight refactoring of the same hardening done in PaX and Grsecurity.

Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
---
 include/linux/list.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
 lib/list_debug.c     | 35 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/list.h b/include/linux/list.h
index 5183138aa932..c38ff652ab59 100644
--- a/include/linux/list.h
+++ b/include/linux/list.h
@@ -28,27 +28,37 @@ static inline void INIT_LIST_HEAD(struct list_head *list)
 	list->prev = list;
 }
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST
+extern bool __list_add_debug(struct list_head *new,
+			      struct list_head *prev,
+			      struct list_head *next);
+#else
+static inline bool __list_add_debug(struct list_head *new,
+				struct list_head *prev,
+				struct list_head *next)
+{
+	return true;
+}
+#endif
+
 /*
  * Insert a new entry between two known consecutive entries.
  *
  * This is only for internal list manipulation where we know
  * the prev/next entries already!
  */
-#ifndef CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST
 static inline void __list_add(struct list_head *new,
 			      struct list_head *prev,
 			      struct list_head *next)
 {
+	if (!__list_add_debug(new, prev, next))
+		return;
+
 	next->prev = new;
 	new->next = next;
 	new->prev = prev;
 	WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, new);
 }
-#else
-extern void __list_add(struct list_head *new,
-			      struct list_head *prev,
-			      struct list_head *next);
-#endif
 
 /**
  * list_add - add a new entry
diff --git a/lib/list_debug.c b/lib/list_debug.c
index 3859bf63561c..5d78982eeb99 100644
--- a/lib/list_debug.c
+++ b/lib/list_debug.c
@@ -19,27 +19,28 @@
  * the prev/next entries already!
  */
 
-void __list_add(struct list_head *new,
+bool __list_add_debug(struct list_head *new,
 			      struct list_head *prev,
 			      struct list_head *next)
 {
-	WARN(next->prev != prev,
-		"list_add corruption. next->prev should be "
-		"prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
-		prev, next->prev, next);
-	WARN(prev->next != next,
-		"list_add corruption. prev->next should be "
-		"next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
-		next, prev->next, prev);
-	WARN(new == prev || new == next,
-	     "list_add double add: new=%p, prev=%p, next=%p.\n",
-	     new, prev, next);
-	next->prev = new;
-	new->next = next;
-	new->prev = prev;
-	WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, new);
+	if (unlikely(next->prev != prev)) {
+		WARN(1, "list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
+			prev, next->prev, next);
+		return false;
+	}
+	if (unlikely(prev->next != next)) {
+		WARN(1, "list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
+			next, prev->next, prev);
+		return false;
+	}
+	if (unlikely(new == prev || new == next)) {
+		WARN(1, "list_add double add: new=%p, prev=%p, next=%p.\n",
+			new, prev, next);
+		return false;
+	}
+	return true;
 }
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(__list_add);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(__list_add_debug);
 
 void __list_del_entry(struct list_head *entry)
 {
-- 
2.7.4

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ