linux-kernel - [PATCH 3.16 149/204] x86/uaccess, sched/preempt: Verify access

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: <lsq.1514480744.549122113@decadent.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 28 Dec 2017 17:05:44 +0000
From:   Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
CC:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@...capital.net>
Subject: [PATCH 3.16 149/204] x86/uaccess, sched/preempt: Verify
 access_ok() context

3.16.52-rc1 review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>

commit 7c4788950ba5922fde976d80b72baf46f14dee8d upstream.

I recently encountered wreckage because access_ok() was used where it
should not be, add an explicit WARN when access_ok() is used wrongly.

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
[bwh: Backported to 3.16:
 - Adjust filename
 - Include <linux/preempt_mask.h> in <asm/uaccess.h> since it's not included by
   <linux/uaccess.h>]
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h | 13 +++++++++++--
 include/linux/preempt_mask.h   | 21 +++++++++++++--------
 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
 #include <linux/compiler.h>
 #include <linux/thread_info.h>
 #include <linux/string.h>
+#include <linux/preempt_mask.h>
 #include <asm/asm.h>
 #include <asm/page.h>
 #include <asm/smap.h>
@@ -66,6 +67,12 @@ static inline bool __chk_range_not_ok(un
 	__chk_range_not_ok((unsigned long __force)(addr), size, limit); \
 })
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP
+# define WARN_ON_IN_IRQ()	WARN_ON_ONCE(!in_task())
+#else
+# define WARN_ON_IN_IRQ()
+#endif
+
 /**
  * access_ok: - Checks if a user space pointer is valid
  * @type: Type of access: %VERIFY_READ or %VERIFY_WRITE.  Note that
@@ -85,8 +92,11 @@ static inline bool __chk_range_not_ok(un
  * checks that the pointer is in the user space range - after calling
  * this function, memory access functions may still return -EFAULT.
  */
-#define access_ok(type, addr, size) \
-	likely(!__range_not_ok(addr, size, user_addr_max()))
+#define access_ok(type, addr, size)					\
+({									\
+	WARN_ON_IN_IRQ();						\
+	likely(!__range_not_ok(addr, size, user_addr_max()));		\
+})
 
 /*
  * The exception table consists of pairs of addresses relative to the
--- a/include/linux/preempt_mask.h
+++ b/include/linux/preempt_mask.h
@@ -57,19 +57,24 @@
 
 /*
  * Are we doing bottom half or hardware interrupt processing?
- * Are we in a softirq context? Interrupt context?
- * in_softirq - Are we currently processing softirq or have bh disabled?
- * in_serving_softirq - Are we currently processing softirq?
+ *
+ * in_irq()       - We're in (hard) IRQ context
+ * in_softirq()   - We have BH disabled, or are processing softirqs
+ * in_interrupt() - We're in NMI,IRQ,SoftIRQ context or have BH disabled
+ * in_serving_softirq() - We're in softirq context
+ * in_nmi()       - We're in NMI context
+ * in_task()	  - We're in task context
+ *
+ * Note: due to the BH disabled confusion: in_softirq(),in_interrupt() really
+ *       should not be used in new code.
  */
 #define in_irq()		(hardirq_count())
 #define in_softirq()		(softirq_count())
 #define in_interrupt()		(irq_count())
 #define in_serving_softirq()	(softirq_count() & SOFTIRQ_OFFSET)
-
-/*
- * Are we in NMI context?
- */
-#define in_nmi()	(preempt_count() & NMI_MASK)
+#define in_nmi()		(preempt_count() & NMI_MASK)
+#define in_task()		(!(preempt_count() & \
+				   (NMI_MASK | HARDIRQ_MASK | SOFTIRQ_OFFSET)))
 
 /*
  * The preempt_count offset after preempt_disable();