linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: fix kaslr and memmap collision

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170104015745.GB15788@x1>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2017 09:57:45 +0800
From:   Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        david <david@...morbit.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, dyoung@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix kaslr and memmap collision

On 01/03/17 at 01:15pm, Dave Jiang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 01/03/2017 11:24 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 12:31 AM, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Dan,
> >>
> >> On 11/22/16 at 09:26am, Dan Williams wrote:
> >>> [ replying for Dave since he's offline today and tomorrow ]
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:47 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> * Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE relocates the kernel to a random base address.
> >>>>> However it does not take into account the memmap= parameter passed in from
> >>>>> the kernel commandline.
> >>>>
> >>>> memmap= parameters are often used as a list.
> >>>>
> >>>>> [...] This results in the kernel sometimes being put in the middle of the user
> >>>>> memmap. [...]
> >>>>
> >>>> What does this mean? If memmap= is used to re-define the memory map then the
> >>>> kernel getting in the middle of a RAM area is what we want, isn't it? What we
> >>>> don't want is for the kernel to get into reserved areas, right?
> >>>
> >>> Right, this is about teaching kaslr to not land the kernel in newly
> >>> defined reserved regions that were not marked reserved in the initial
> >>> e820 map from platform firmware.
> >>
> >> If only tell kaslr to not land kernel in newly defined reserved regions,
> >> memory added by "memmap=nn[KMG]@ss[KMG]" should not be avoided since
> >> it's usable memory. Kernel randomized into this region is also what we
> >> want. Not sure if I understand it right.
> > 
> > You're right, this is supposed to be for memmap=nn!ss cases which
> > defines reserved persistent memory ranges, not memmap=nn@ss which
> > defines usable memory.
> > 
> > We need to fix mem_avoid_memmap() to only skip memmap= statements that
> > specify reserved memory.

Thanks for confirmation, Dan!

> > 
> 
> I think nn@ss is the only one that we should skip over, otherwise
> everything else looks like should be avoided. I'll update.
Hi Dave,

I guess your purpose is to avoid the user defined reserved memory and
pmem which I am not very sure about since kaslr won't stamp on ACPI
region reported by BIOS. Seems OK to avoid them all except of nn@ss.

I have other concerns, will directly comment in your v4 post.

Thanks
Baoquan