linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 6/9] x86/cet/ibt: Add arch

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: <CALCETrWTu-zuSKn6e3=QkP4_ca8PJfuevMD8KJq0VX3nq7Hw8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Oct 2018 09:08:12 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
Cc:     Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.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>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
        Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        "H. J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        "Shanbhogue, Vedvyas" <vedvyas.shanbhogue@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 6/9] x86/cet/ibt: Add arch_prctl functions for IBT

> On Oct 4, 2018, at 8:37 AM, Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2018-10-04 at 15:28 +0200, Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 08:05:50AM -0700, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
>>> Update ARCH_CET_STATUS and ARCH_CET_DISABLE to include Indirect
>>> Branch Tracking features.
>>>
>>> Introduce:
>>>
>>> arch_prctl(ARCH_CET_LEGACY_BITMAP, unsigned long *addr)
>>>    Enable the Indirect Branch Tracking legacy code bitmap.
>>>
>>>    The parameter 'addr' is a pointer to a user buffer.
>>>    On returning to the caller, the kernel fills the following:
>>>
>>>    *addr = IBT bitmap base address
>>>    *(addr + 1) = IBT bitmap size
>>
>> Again, some structure with a size field would be better from
>> UAPI/extensibility standpoint.
>>
>> One additional point: "size" in the structure from kernel should have
>> structure size expected by kernel, and at least providing there "0" from
>> user space shouldn't lead to failure (in fact, it is possible to provide
>> structure size back to userspace even if buffer is too small, along
>> with error).
>
> This has been in GLIBC v2.28.  We cannot change it anymore.

Sure you can. Just change ARCH_CET_LEGACY_BITMAP to a new number.  You
might need to change all the constants.  And if the ELF note by itself
causes a problem too, you may need to rename it.  And maybe ask glibc
to kindly not enable code that depends on non-upstreamed kernel
features.

There is not, and has never been, any ABI compatibility requirement
that says that, if glibc 2.28 "enables" a feature, that the kernel
will ever enable it in a way that makes glibc 2.28 actually support
it.  All the kernel needs to do is avoid making glibc 2.28 *crash*.