[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <145668759.9406.1530219355192.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:55:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Chris Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Ben Maurer <bmaurer@...com>,
rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH for 4.18 2/2] rseq: check that rseq->rseq_cs padding
is zero
----- On Jun 28, 2018, at 12:53 PM, Will Deacon will.deacon@....com wrote:
> Hi Mathieu,
>
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:23:59PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> On 32-bit kernels, the rseq->rseq_cs_padding field is never read by the
>> kernel. However, 64-bit kernels dealing with 32-bit compat tasks read the
>> full 64-bit in its entirety, and terminates the offending process with
>> a segmentation fault if the upper 32 bits are set due to failure of
>> copy_from_user().
>>
>> Ensure that both 32-bit and 64-bit kernels dealing with 32-bit tasks end
>> up terminating offending tasks with a segmentation fault if the upper
>> 32-bit padding bits (rseq->rseq_cs_padding) are set by adding an explicit
>> check that padding is zero on 32-bit kernels.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
>> CC: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
>> CC: Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
>> CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>> CC: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
>> CC: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
>> CC: Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>
>> CC: Chris Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
>> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
>> CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
>> CC: Ben Maurer <bmaurer@...com>
>> CC: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
>> CC: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
>> CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
>> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>> CC: Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
>> CC: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
>> CC: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
>> CC: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
>> CC: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
>> CC: linux-api@...r.kernel.org
>> ---
>> kernel/rseq.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/rseq.c b/kernel/rseq.c
>> index 4ba582046fcd..b038f35a60d6 100644
>> --- a/kernel/rseq.c
>> +++ b/kernel/rseq.c
>> @@ -112,6 +112,29 @@ static int rseq_reset_rseq_cpu_id(struct task_struct *t)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +#ifndef __LP64__
>> +/*
>> + * Ensure that padding is zero.
>> + */
>> +static int check_rseq_cs_padding(struct task_struct *t)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long pad;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + ret = __get_user(pad, &t->rseq->rseq_cs_padding);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> + if (pad)
>> + return -EFAULT;
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +#else
>> +static int check_rseq_cs_padding(struct task_struct *t)
>> +{
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +#endif
>
> I'm still not sure how this works with a 64-bit kernel and a compat (32-bit)
> task. The check_rseq_cs_padding() will return 0 regardless of the upper bits
> of the rseq_cs field, whereas a native 32-bit kernel would actually go and
> check them.
>
> What am I missing here?
With a 64-bit kernel, we end up in the #else, which means check_rseq_cs_padding()
always returns 0.
On that 64-bit kernel, all 64 bits of rseq->rseq_cs are read, including the
padding. Therefore, all those bits are contained in the pointer passed as
argument to copy_from_user(), which will cause copy_from_user() to accurately
fail on an invalid user-space address.
Therefore, 64-bit kernels already check those padding bits by means of trying to use
that pointer to access user-space data with copy_from_user, which does an access_ok
check.
So both 32-bit and 64-bit kernels will end up killing the process with segmentation
fault if a 32-bit userland populates those padding bits with anything other than
0.
Does it seem acceptable ?
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> Will
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists