[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOphjpPd3HnKAdU-RmG0RGj6c2oAbnq+C2Jd1srsqTA7=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 21:22:13 -0700
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Shanbhogue, Vedvyas" <vedvyas.shanbhogue@...el.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
mike.kravetz@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] x86/cet: Add arch_prctl functions for shadow stack
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 3:02 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 2:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 1:33 PM Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2018-06-07 at 11:48 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 7:41 AM Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > The following operations are provided.
>>> > >
>>> > > ARCH_CET_STATUS:
>>> > > return the current CET status
>>> > >
>>> > > ARCH_CET_DISABLE:
>>> > > disable CET features
>>> > >
>>> > > ARCH_CET_LOCK:
>>> > > lock out CET features
>>> > >
>>> > > ARCH_CET_EXEC:
>>> > > set CET features for exec()
>>> > >
>>> > > ARCH_CET_ALLOC_SHSTK:
>>> > > allocate a new shadow stack
>>> > >
>>> > > ARCH_CET_PUSH_SHSTK:
>>> > > put a return address on shadow stack
>>> > >
>> And why do we need ARCH_CET_EXEC?
>>
>> For background, I really really dislike adding new state that persists
>> across exec(). It's nice to get as close to a clean slate as possible
>> after exec() so that programs can run in a predictable environment.
>> exec() is also a security boundary, and anything a task can do to
>> affect itself after exec() needs to have its security implications
>> considered very carefully. (As a trivial example, you should not be
>> able to use cetcmd ... sudo [malicious options here] to cause sudo to
>> run with CET off and then try to exploit it via the malicious options.
>>
>> If a shutoff is needed for testing, how about teaching ld.so to parse
>> LD_CET=no or similar and protect it the same way as LD_PRELOAD is
>> protected. Or just do LD_PRELOAD=/lib/libdoesntsupportcet.so.
>>
>
> I will take a look.
We can use LD_CET to turn off CET. Since most of legacy binaries
are compatible with shadow stack, ARCH_CET_EXEC can be used
to turn on shadow stack on legacy binaries:
[hjl@...-cet-1 glibc]$ readelf -n /bin/ls| head -10
Displaying notes found in: .note.ABI-tag
Owner Data size Description
GNU 0x00000010 NT_GNU_ABI_TAG (ABI version tag)
OS: Linux, ABI: 3.2.0
Displaying notes found in: .note.gnu.property
Owner Data size Description
GNU 0x00000020 NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0
Properties: x86 ISA used:
[hjl@...-cet-1 glibc]$ cetcmd --on -- /bin/ls /
Segmentation fault
[hjl@...-cet-1 glibc]$ cetcmd --on -f shstk -- /bin/ls /
bin dev export lib libx32 media mnt opt root sbin sys usr
boot etc home lib64 lost+found misc net proc run srv tmp var
[hjl@...-cet-1 glibc]$ cetcmd --on -f ibt -- /bin/ls /
Segmentation fault
[hjl@...-cet-1 glibc]$
--
H.J.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists