linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] elf: align AT

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:   Thu, 30 May 2019 09:44:21 +0300
From:   Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] elf: align AT_RANDOM bytes

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 03:20:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2019 00:37:08 +0300 Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > AT_RANDOM content is always misaligned on x86_64:
> > 
> > 	$ LD_SHOW_AUXV=1 /bin/true | grep AT_RANDOM
> > 	AT_RANDOM:       0x7fff02101019
> > 
> > glibc copies first few bytes for stack protector stuff, aligned
> > access should be slightly faster.
> 
> I just don't understand the implications of this.  Is there
> (badly-behaved) userspace out there which makes assumptions about the
> current alignment?

I don't think so: glibc has getauxval(AT_RANDOM) and userspace should
use whatever it returns as "char[16]" base pointer;

> How much faster, anyway?  How frequently is the AT_RANDOM record
> accessed?

I don't think it is measureable :-\

It is accessed twice per execve: first by the kernel putting data there,
second by glibc fetching first sizeof(uintptr_t) bytes for stack canary.

Here is stack layout at the beginning of execution:

....10  e8 03 00 00 00 00 00 00  17 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
....20  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  19 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
				 AT_RANDOM=25
....30  79 dd ff ff ff 7f 00 00  1a 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |y...............|
	AT_RANDOM pointer
....40  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  1f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
....50  e2 ef ff ff ff 7f 00 00  0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
....60  89 dd ff ff ff 7f 00 00  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  |................|
				    AT_RANDOM bytes (misaligned)
....70  00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  00|a2 ef 76 37 0c 0c 69  |...........v7..i|
....80  04 32 68 e4 68 2d 53 cf  a5|78 38 36 5f 36 34 00  |.2h.h-S..x86_64.|
	AT_RANDOM------------------|"x86_64" (misaligned)

		 argv[0], envp[0]
....90  00 00 00|2f 68 6f 6d 65  2f 61 64 2f 73 2d 74 65  |.../home/ad/s-te|
....a0  73 74 2f 61 2e 6f 75 74  00 47 53 5f 4c 49 42 3d  |st/a.out.GS_LIB=|

> I often have questions such as these about your performance/space
> tweaks :(.  Please try to address them as a matter of course when
> preparing changelogs?

OK.