linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][v3] uprobes/x86: emulate push insns for uprobe on x86

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: <20171115153835.GA21275@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Nov 2017 16:38:35 +0100
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:     Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Cc:     mingo@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, ast@...com, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH][v3] uprobes/x86: emulate push insns for uprobe on x86

On 11/14, Yonghong Song wrote:
>
> On 11/14/17 7:51 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> >And test_thread_flag(TIF_ADDR32) is not right too. The caller is not
> >necessarily the probed task. See is_64bit_mm(mm) in arch_uprobe_analyze_insn().
>
> I printed out some statistics. On x86_64 platform, for 32bit application,
> test_thread_flag(TIF_ADDR32) returns true

See above. The caller can be 64-bit even if the probed task is 32bit. Or
vice versa.

> and is_64bit_mm(mm) returns false.

This is what we need. Again, see its usage in arch_uprobe_analyze_insn()
and note that mm != current->mm.

> So that is why my patch works fine.

test_thread_flag() can't work in general, see above.

> I did not fully understand how to trigger "the caller is not necessarily the
> probed task." So in the next revision, I will use is_64bit_mm(mm) instead.

register_for_each_vma() paths can call arch_uprobe_analyze_insn(), the task
which calls register_ has is not necessarily the task(s) we want to probe.

> >And again... please check if uprobe_init_insn() fails or not in this case
> >(32bit task does, say, "push r8"). If it fails, your V2 should be fine.
>
> The compiler won't generated "push r8" for 32bit task since register "r8" is
> not available on 32bit instruction.

And?

uprobes should be transparent even when it comes to user-space bugs. If
a 32bit app does asm(".byte 0x41, 0x50") for any reason we should either
deny to probe this insn (uprobe_init_insn() should fail), or we should
execute it out-of-line so that it will be trapped correctly.

Oleg.