| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20180430090527.GC6509@pd.tnic>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:05:27 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@...iej.szmigiero.name>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/6] x86/microcode/AMD: Check microcode container data
in the late loader
On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 11:34:09PM +0200, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> This commit converts the late loader in the AMD microcode update driver to
> use newly introduced microcode container data checking functions as the
> previous commit did for the early loader.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <mail@...iej.szmigiero.name>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 87 +++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> index 94fcd702a67a..b429d3f554b9 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> @@ -677,28 +677,24 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_amd(int cpu)
> return UCODE_UPDATED;
> }
>
> -static int install_equiv_cpu_table(const u8 *buf)
> +static unsigned int install_equiv_cpu_table(const u8 *buf, size_t buf_size)
> {
> - unsigned int *ibuf = (unsigned int *)buf;
> - unsigned int type = ibuf[1];
> - unsigned int size = ibuf[2];
> + const u32 *hdr = (const u32 *)buf;
Ok, since we're verifying now, let's do that assignment...
> + u32 equiv_tbl_len;
>
> - if (type != UCODE_EQUIV_CPU_TABLE_TYPE || !size) {
> - pr_err("empty section/"
> - "invalid type field in container file section header\n");
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> + if (!verify_equivalence_table(buf, buf_size, false))
> + return 0;
... after the check has passed.
> - equiv_cpu_table = vmalloc(size);
> + equiv_tbl_len = hdr[2];
<---- newline here.
> + equiv_cpu_table = vmalloc(equiv_tbl_len);
> if (!equiv_cpu_table) {
> pr_err("failed to allocate equivalent CPU table\n");
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + return 0;
> }
>
> - memcpy(equiv_cpu_table, buf + CONTAINER_HDR_SZ, size);
> + memcpy(equiv_cpu_table, buf + CONTAINER_HDR_SZ, equiv_tbl_len);
>
> - /* add header length */
> - return size + CONTAINER_HDR_SZ;
> + return equiv_tbl_len;
> }
>
> static void free_equiv_cpu_table(void)
> @@ -715,20 +711,26 @@ static void cleanup(void)
>
> /*
> * We return the current size even if some of the checks failed so that
> - * we can skip over the next patch. If we return a negative value, we
> - * signal a grave error like a memory allocation has failed and the
> - * driver cannot continue functioning normally. In such cases, we tear
> - * down everything we've used up so far and exit.
> + * we can skip over the next patch. If we return zero, we signal a
> + * grave error like a memory allocation has failed and the driver cannot
> + * continue functioning normally. In such cases, we tear down everything
> + * we've used up so far and exit.
> */
> -static int verify_and_add_patch(u8 family, u8 *fw, unsigned int leftover)
> +static unsigned int verify_and_add_patch(u8 family, u8 *fw,
> + unsigned int leftover)
> {
> + u32 *hdr = (u32 *)fw;
> struct microcode_header_amd *mc_hdr;
> struct ucode_patch *patch;
> - unsigned int patch_size, crnt_size, ret;
> + u32 patch_size;
> + unsigned int crnt_size;
> u32 proc_fam;
> u16 proc_id;
>
> - patch_size = *(u32 *)(fw + 4);
> + if (!verify_patch_section(fw, leftover, false))
> + return leftover;
> +
> + patch_size = hdr[1];
> crnt_size = patch_size + SECTION_HDR_SIZE;
> mc_hdr = (struct microcode_header_amd *)(fw + SECTION_HDR_SIZE);
> proc_id = mc_hdr->processor_rev_id;
> @@ -750,28 +752,20 @@ static int verify_and_add_patch(u8 family, u8 *fw, unsigned int leftover)
> return crnt_size;
> }
>
> - /*
> - * The section header length is not included in this indicated size
> - * but is present in the leftover file length so we need to subtract
> - * it before passing this value to the function below.
> - */
> - ret = verify_patch_size(family, patch_size, leftover - SECTION_HDR_SIZE);
> - if (!ret) {
> - pr_err("Patch-ID 0x%08x: size mismatch.\n", mc_hdr->patch_id);
> + if (!verify_patch(family, fw, leftover, false))
> return crnt_size;
> - }
>
> patch = kzalloc(sizeof(*patch), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!patch) {
> pr_err("Patch allocation failure.\n");
> - return -EINVAL;
> + return 0;
So by convention returning 0 is success and negative value means error.
I don't see the reason for changing that in the whole code.
> }
>
> patch->data = kmemdup(fw + SECTION_HDR_SIZE, patch_size, GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!patch->data) {
> pr_err("Patch data allocation failure.\n");
> kfree(patch);
> - return -EINVAL;
> + return 0;
> }
>
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&patch->plist);
> @@ -793,26 +787,27 @@ static enum ucode_state __load_microcode_amd(u8 family, const u8 *data,
> enum ucode_state ret = UCODE_ERROR;
> unsigned int leftover;
> u8 *fw = (u8 *)data;
> - int crnt_size = 0;
> - int offset;
> + unsigned int offset;
>
> - offset = install_equiv_cpu_table(data);
> - if (offset < 0) {
> + offset = install_equiv_cpu_table(data, size);
> + if (!offset) {
> pr_err("failed to create equivalent cpu table\n");
> return ret;
> }
> - fw += offset;
> - leftover = size - offset;
>
> - if (*(u32 *)fw != UCODE_UCODE_TYPE) {
> - pr_err("invalid type field in container file section header\n");
> - free_equiv_cpu_table();
> - return ret;
> - }
> + /*
> + * Skip also the container header, since install_equiv_cpu_table()
> + * returns just the raw equivalence table size without the header.
> + */
> + fw += CONTAINER_HDR_SZ;
> + fw += offset;
> + leftover = size - CONTAINER_HDR_SZ - offset;
>
> while (leftover) {
> + unsigned int crnt_size;
> +
> crnt_size = verify_and_add_patch(family, fw, leftover);
> - if (crnt_size < 0)
> + if (!crnt_size)
Ditto.
> return ret;
>
> fw += crnt_size;
> @@ -895,10 +890,8 @@ static enum ucode_state request_microcode_amd(int cpu, struct device *device,
> }
>
> ret = UCODE_ERROR;
> - if (*(u32 *)fw->data != UCODE_MAGIC) {
> - pr_err("invalid magic value (0x%08x)\n", *(u32 *)fw->data);
> + if (!verify_container(fw->data, fw->size, false))
> goto fw_release;
> - }
>
> ret = load_microcode_amd(bsp, c->x86, fw->data, fw->size);
>
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists