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  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:   Sat, 2 Sep 2017 00:30:22 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/refcounts, x86/asm: Use unique .text section for
 refcount exceptions

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 9:03 PM, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-09-01 at 13:22 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> Using .text.unlikely for refcount exceptions isn't safe because gcc may
>> move entire functions into .text.unlikely (e.g. in6_dev_get()), which
>> would cause any uses of a protected refcount_t function to stay inline
>> with the function, triggering the protection unconditionally:
>>
>>         .section        .text.unlikely,"ax",@progbits
>>         .type   in6_dev_get, @function
>> in6_dev_getx:
>> .LFB4673:
>>         .loc 2 4128 0
>>         .cfi_startproc
>> ...
>>         lock; incl 480(%rbx)
>>         js 111f
>>         .pushsection .text.unlikely
>> 111:    lea 480(%rbx), %rcx
>> 112:    .byte 0x0f, 0xff
>> .popsection
>> 113:
>>
>> This creates a unique .text section and adds an additional test to the
>> exception handler to WARN in the case of having none of OF, SF, nor ZF
>> set so we can see things like this more easily in the future.
>
> Closure: gcc-4.8.5 now builds a functional kernel as well, so that
> aspect of this bug was just a larger a dose of the same toxin.

Okay, excellent. Thanks for checking!

>
> Question below.
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/refcount.h
> b/arch/x86/include/asm/refcount.h
>> index ff871210b9f2..4e44250e7d0d 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/refcount.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/refcount.h
>> @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
>>   * back to the regular execution flow in .text.
>>   */
>>  #define _REFCOUNT_EXCEPTION                          \
>> -     ".pushsection .text.unlikely\n"                 \
>> +     ".pushsection .text..refcount\n"                \
>
> Why two dots? (.text.refcount_ex?)

A dot keeps it out of the TEXT_MAIN macro namespace (see cb87481ee89db
in -next, which is function names: [a-zA-Z0-9_]) to avoid collisions
and so it can be put at the end with text.unlikely to keep the cold
code together.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security

Powered by blists - more mailing lists