linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/38] Annotate hardware config module parameters in arch/x86/mm/

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: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1704142007590.2327@nanos>
Date:   Fri, 14 Apr 2017 20:15:49 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        x86@...nel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/38] Annotate hardware config module parameters in
 arch/x86/mm/

On Wed, 5 Apr 2017, David Howells wrote:

The subject line hardly qualifies as a valid one.

    arch/subsys: Short description

Do I really have to explain that to you?

> When the kernel is running in secure boot mode, we lock down the kernel to
> prevent userspace from modifying the running kernel image.  Whilst this
> includes prohibiting access to things like /dev/mem, it must also prevent
> access by means of configuring driver modules in such a way as to cause a
> device to access or modify the kernel image.
> 
> To this end, annotate module_param* statements that refer to hardware
> configuration and indicate for future reference what type of parameter they
> specify.  The parameter parser in the core sees this information and can
> skip such parameters with an error message if the kernel is locked down.
> The module initialisation then runs as normal, but just sees whatever the
> default values for those parameters is.
> 
> Note that we do still need to do the module initialisation because some
> drivers have viable defaults set in case parameters aren't specified and
> some drivers support automatic configuration (e.g. PNP or PCI) in addition
> to manually coded parameters.
> 
> This patch annotates drivers in arch/x86/mm/.

We already know that this is a patch. There is a chapter in
Documentation/process/SubmittingPatches which explains that. That file is
not only for newbies.

> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/testmmiotrace.c b/arch/x86/mm/testmmiotrace.c
> index 38868adf07ea..f6ae6830b341 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/testmmiotrace.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/testmmiotrace.c
> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
>  #include <linux/mmiotrace.h>
>  
>  static unsigned long mmio_address;
> -module_param(mmio_address, ulong, 0);
> +module_param_hw(mmio_address, ulong, iomem, 0);
>  MODULE_PARM_DESC(mmio_address, " Start address of the mapping of 16 kB "
>  				"(or 8 MB if read_far is non-zero).");

The copied boilerplate above is really nonsensical here. The default
address is 0, so the init function will emit:

     pr_err("you have to use the module argument mmio_address.\n");
     pr_err("DO NOT LOAD THIS MODULE UNLESS YOU REALLY KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING!\n");

Pretty useless when you can't supply a valid address.

       if (kernel_locked_down()) {
       		pr_info("This is not allowed because ...");
		return -EPERM;
       }

would make too much sense for the user, right?

Thanks,

	tglx