linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

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, 24 May 2019 11:11:40 +0100
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:     Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>,
        Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
        Alexander Deucher <Alexander.Deucher@....com>,
        Christian Koenig <Christian.Koenig@....com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
        Lee Smith <Lee.Smith@....com>,
        Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@....com>,
        Jacob Bramley <Jacob.Bramley@....com>,
        Ruben Ayrapetyan <Ruben.Ayrapetyan@....com>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>,
        Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
        Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@....com>,
        Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>,
        Elliott Hughes <enh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 03:49:05PM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> On 5/23/19 2:11 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:51:40AM -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> >> On 5/21/19 6:04 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> >>> As an aside: I think Sparc ADI support in Linux actually side-stepped
> >>> this[1] (i.e. chose "solution 1"): "All addresses passed to kernel must
> >>> be non-ADI tagged addresses." (And sadly, "Kernel does not enable ADI
> >>> for kernel code.") I think this was a mistake we should not repeat for
> >>> arm64 (we do seem to be at least in agreement about this, I think).
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/654481/
> >>
> >> That is a very early version of the sparc ADI patch. Support for tagged
> >> addresses in syscalls was added in later versions and is in the patch
> >> that is in the kernel.
> > 
> > I tried to figure out but I'm not familiar with the sparc port. How did
> > you solve the tagged address going into various syscall implementations
> > in the kernel (e.g. sys_write)? Is the tag removed on kernel entry or it
> > ends up deeper in the core code?
> 
> Another spot I should point out in ADI patch - Tags are not stored in
> VMAs and IOMMU does not support ADI tags on M7. ADI tags are stripped
> before userspace addresses are passed to IOMMU in the following snippet
> from the patch:
> 
> diff --git a/arch/sparc/mm/gup.c b/arch/sparc/mm/gup.c
> index 5335ba3c850e..357b6047653a 100644
> --- a/arch/sparc/mm/gup.c
> +++ b/arch/sparc/mm/gup.c
> @@ -201,6 +202,24 @@ int __get_user_pages_fast(unsigned long start, int
> nr_pages
> , int write,
>         pgd_t *pgdp;
>         int nr = 0;
> 
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARC64
> +       if (adi_capable()) {
> +               long addr = start;
> +
> +               /* If userspace has passed a versioned address, kernel
> +                * will not find it in the VMAs since it does not store
> +                * the version tags in the list of VMAs. Storing version
> +                * tags in list of VMAs is impractical since they can be
> +                * changed any time from userspace without dropping into
> +                * kernel. Any address search in VMAs will be done with
> +                * non-versioned addresses. Ensure the ADI version bits
> +                * are dropped here by sign extending the last bit before
> +                * ADI bits. IOMMU does not implement version tags.
> +                */
> +               addr = (addr << (long)adi_nbits()) >> (long)adi_nbits();
> +               start = addr;
> +       }
> +#endif
>         start &= PAGE_MASK;
>         addr = start;
>         len = (unsigned long) nr_pages << PAGE_SHIFT;

Thanks Khalid. I missed that sparc does not enable HAVE_GENERIC_GUP, so
you fix this case here. If we add the generic untagged_addr() macro in
the generic code, I think sparc can start making use of it rather than
open-coding the shifts.

There are a few other other places where tags can leak and the core code
would get confused (for example, madvise()). I presume your user space
doesn't exercise them. On arm64 we plan to just allow the C library to
tag any new memory allocation, so those core code paths would need to be
covered.

And similarly, devices, IOMMU, any DMA would ignore tags.

-- 
Catalin