linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] x86/ftrace: Make sure that ftrace trampolines are not RWX

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: <87bmqf977n.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Date:   Fri, 26 May 2017 21:40:44 +1000
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "x86\@kernel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] x86/ftrace: Make sure that ftrace trampolines are not RWX

Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com> writes:

> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 09:03:13AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > It seems like it really should. That would put it in a single place
>> > and avoid this mistake again in the future. Does module_memfree() have
>> > access to the allocation size, or does that need to get plumbed?
>> 
>> No, it doesn't. But the number of instances is pretty limited.
>> 
>> Btw, looking at BPF. It allocates memory via module_alloc() which means
>> it's RWX. There is nothing in that BPF code which changes the permissions
>> afterwards ....
>
> For BPF you're probably referring to bpf_jit_binary_alloc()? Permissions
> are changed with bpf_jit_binary_lock_ro() within each architecure backend.
>
> Well, except for powerpc (cc'ed Michael).

[hangs head in shame]

Thanks, we are working on this stuff (stricter RWX perms) at the moment,
so will add this to the list. It's complicated somewhat by the variety
of MMUs we support, but still.

cheers