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  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]
Date:   Mon, 10 Jul 2017 05:47:34 +0000
From:   Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
To:     Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
CC:     Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com" <izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com>,
        Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
        "fanc.fnst@...fujitsu.com" <fanc.fnst@...fujitsu.com>,
        Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@...jp.nec.com>,
        "Ard Biesheuvel" <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/boot/KASLR: exclude EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_{CODE|DATA}
 from KASLR's choice

On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 11:58:14AM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Jul, at 06:11:24AM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 11:07:59AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> > > On 07/06/17 at 03:57pm, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 06 Jul, at 08:31:07AM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > > > > +	for (i = 0; i < nr_desc; i++) {
> > > > > +		md = (efi_memory_desc_t *)(pmap + (i * e->efi_memdesc_size));
> > > > > +
> > > > > +		/*
> > > > > +		 * EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_{CODE|DATA} are avoided because boot
> > > > > +		 * services regions could be accessed after ExitBootServices()
> > > > > +		 * due to the workaround for buggy firmware.
> > > > > +		 */
> > > > > +		if (!(md->type == EFI_LOADER_CODE ||
> > > > > +		      md->type == EFI_LOADER_DATA ||
> > > > > +		      md->type == EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY))
> > > > > +			continue;
> > > > 
> > > > Wouldn't it make more sense to *only* use EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY?
> > > > 
> > > > You can't re-use EFI_LOADER_* regions because the kaslr code is run so
> > > > early in boot that you've no idea if data the kernel will need is in
> > > > those EFI_LOADER_* regions.
> > > > 
> > > > For example, we pass struct setup_data objects inside of
> > > > EFI_LOADER_DATA regions.
> > > 
> > > It doesn't matter because we have tried to avoid those memory setup_data
> > > resides in in mem_avoid_overlap(). Here discarding EFI_LOADER_* could
> > > discard the whole regions while setup_data could occupy small part of
> > > them.
> > 
> > Hi Matt, Baoquan,
> > 
> > I added these three checks to accept any regions corresponding to
> > E820_TYPE_RAM except EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_*, just thinking of that it's minimum
> > surprising.  Baoquan gave a good justification on that, so I'll leave it
> > as-is in next version.
> 
> I disagree. The least surprising option would be to use the region
> type that everyone (boot loader, kernel, firmware) agrees is free:
> EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY.

OK, I will do it.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists