linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/7] x86/sci: add core implementation for system call isolation

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]

Date:   Fri, 26 Apr 2019 07:57:38 -0700
From:   James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Adams <jwadams@...gle.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/7] x86/sci: add core implementation for system
 call isolation

On Fri, 2019-04-26 at 07:46 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 4/25/19 2:45 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > After the isolated system call finishes, the mappings created
> > during its execution are cleared.
> 
> Yikes.  I guess that stops someone from calling write() a bunch of
> times on every filesystem using every block device driver and all the
> DM code to get a lot of code/data faulted in.  But, it also means not
> even long-running processes will ever have a chance of behaving
> anything close to normally.
> 
> Is this something you think can be rectified or is there something
> fundamental that would keep SCI page tables from being cached across
> different invocations of the same syscall?

There is some work being done to look at pre-populating the isolated
address space with the expected execution footprint of the system call,
yes.  It lessens the ROP gadget protection slightly because you might
find a gadget in the pre-populated code, but it solves a lot of the
overhead problem.

James