linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/9] x86, pkeys: do not special case protection key 0

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: <20180326173522.GB5743@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:35:23 -0700
From:   Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, dave.hansen@...el.com, mpe@...erman.id.au,
        mingo@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] x86, pkeys: do not special case protection key 0

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 11:09:05AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> 
> From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> mm_pkey_is_allocated() treats pkey 0 as unallocated.  That is
> inconsistent with the manpages, and also inconsistent with
> mm->context.pkey_allocation_map.  Stop special casing it and only
> disallow values that are actually bad (< 0).
> 
> The end-user visible effect of this is that you can now use
> mprotect_pkey() to set pkey=0.
> 
> This is a bit nicer than what Ram proposed because it is simpler
> and removes special-casing for pkey 0.  On the other hand, it does
> allow applciations to pkey_free() pkey-0, but that's just a silly
> thing to do, so we are not going to protect against it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
> Cc: Michael Ellermen <mpe@...erman.id.au>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>p
> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
> ---
> 
>  b/arch/x86/include/asm/mmu_context.h |    2 +-
>  b/arch/x86/include/asm/pkeys.h       |    6 +++---
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff -puN arch/x86/include/asm/mmu_context.h~x86-pkey-0-default-allocated arch/x86/include/asm/mmu_context.h
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mmu_context.h~x86-pkey-0-default-allocated	2018-03-21 15:47:48.182198927 -0700
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mmu_context.h	2018-03-21 15:47:48.187198927 -0700
> @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ static inline int init_new_context(struc
> 
>  #ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
>  	if (cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_OSPKE)) {
> -		/* pkey 0 is the default and always allocated */
> +		/* pkey 0 is the default and allocated implicitly */
>  		mm->context.pkey_allocation_map = 0x1;

In the second patch, you introduce DEFAULT_KEY. Maybe you 
should introduce here and express the above code as

		mm->context.pkey_allocation_map = (0x1 << DEFAULT_KEY);

Incase your default key changes to something else, you are still good.

>  		/* -1 means unallocated or invalid */
>  		mm->context.execute_only_pkey = -1;
> diff -puN arch/x86/include/asm/pkeys.h~x86-pkey-0-default-allocated arch/x86/include/asm/pkeys.h
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pkeys.h~x86-pkey-0-default-allocated	2018-03-21 15:47:48.184198927 -0700
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pkeys.h	2018-03-21 15:47:48.188198927 -0700
> @@ -49,10 +49,10 @@ bool mm_pkey_is_allocated(struct mm_stru
>  {
>  	/*
>  	 * "Allocated" pkeys are those that have been returned
> -	 * from pkey_alloc().  pkey 0 is special, and never
> -	 * returned from pkey_alloc().
> +	 * from pkey_alloc() or pkey 0 which is allocated
> +	 * implicitly when the mm is created.
>  	 */
> -	if (pkey <= 0)
> +	if (pkey < 0)
>  		return false;
>  	if (pkey >= arch_max_pkey())
>  		return false;
> _

-- 
Ram Pai