linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/asm: Pin sensitive CR0 bits

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAGXu5j+vBURRz2aUafmOY9nJ56Sr-YonvhE8OGJ+6QkOQe5ePQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Feb 2019 11:45:03 -0800
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/asm: Pin sensitive CR0 bits

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:44 AM Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 03:36:45PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> >  static inline void native_write_cr0(unsigned long val)
> >  {
> > -     asm volatile("mov %0,%%cr0": : "r" (val), "m" (__force_order));
> > +     bool warn = false;
> > +
> > +again:
> > +     val |= X86_CR0_WP;
> > +     /*
> > +      * In order to have the compiler not optimize away the check
> > +      * in the WARN_ONCE(), mark "val" as being also an output ("+r")
>
> This comment is now slightly out of date: the check is no longer "in the
> WARN_ONCE()".  Ditto about the comment for CR4.

Ah yes, good point. I will adjust and send a v2 series.

>
> > +      * by this asm() block so it will perform an explicit check, as
> > +      * if it were "volatile".
> > +      */
> > +     asm volatile("mov %0,%%cr0": "+r" (val) : "m" (__force_order) : );
> > +     /*
> > +      * If the MOV above was used directly as a ROP gadget we can
> > +      * notice the lack of pinned bits in "val" and start the function
> > +      * from the beginning to gain the WP bit for sure. And do it
> > +      * without first taking the exception for a WARN().
> > +      */
> > +     if ((val & X86_CR0_WP) != X86_CR0_WP) {
> > +             warn = true;
> > +             goto again;
> > +     }
> > +     WARN_ONCE(warn, "Attempt to unpin X86_CR0_WP, cr0 bypass attack?!\n");
> >  }
>
> Alexander

-- 
Kees Cook