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: <148711851481.5814.3328157719017495110.stgit@devbox>
Date:   Wed, 15 Feb 2017 09:28:45 +0900
From:   Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To:     Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jon Medhurst <tixy@...aro.org>,
        Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        "David A . Long" <dave.long@...aro.org>,
        Sandeepa Prabhu <sandeepa.s.prabhu@...il.com>
Subject: [BUGFIX PATCH V2 1/3] kprobes/arm: Allow to handle reentered kprobe on single-stepping

This is arm port of commit 6a5022a56ac3 ("kprobes/x86: Allow to
handle reentered kprobe on single-stepping")

Since the FIQ handlers can interrupt in the single stepping
(or preparing the single stepping, do_debug etc.), we should
consider a kprobe is hit in the NMI handler. Even in that
case, the kprobe is allowed to be reentered as same as the
kprobes is hit in kprobe handlers (KPROBE_HIT_ACTIVE or
KPROBE_HIT_SSDONE.)

The real issue will happen when a kprobe hit while another
reentered kprobe is processing (KPROBE_REENTER), because
we already consumed a saved-area for the previous kprobe.

Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Acked-by: Jon Medhurst <tixy@...aro.org>
Reported-by: Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
---
 arch/arm/probes/kprobes/core.c |    6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/core.c b/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/core.c
index a4ec240..264fedb 100644
--- a/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/core.c
+++ b/arch/arm/probes/kprobes/core.c
@@ -270,6 +270,7 @@ void __kprobes kprobe_handler(struct pt_regs *regs)
 			switch (kcb->kprobe_status) {
 			case KPROBE_HIT_ACTIVE:
 			case KPROBE_HIT_SSDONE:
+			case KPROBE_HIT_SS:
 				/* A pre- or post-handler probe got us here. */
 				kprobes_inc_nmissed_count(p);
 				save_previous_kprobe(kcb);
@@ -278,6 +279,11 @@ void __kprobes kprobe_handler(struct pt_regs *regs)
 				singlestep(p, regs, kcb);
 				restore_previous_kprobe(kcb);
 				break;
+			case KPROBE_REENTER:
+				/* A nested probe was hit in FIQ, it is a BUG */
+				pr_warn("Unrecoverable kprobe detected at %p.\n",
+					p->addr);
+				/* fall through */
 			default:
 				/* impossible cases */
 				BUG();

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ