| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <d3dc2b1f-e8c9-c60d-f648-0bc9b08f20e4@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:09:10 +0100
From: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
Jacob Bramley <Jacob.Bramley@....com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Evgeniy Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@....com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Ruben Ayrapetyan <Ruben.Ayrapetyan@....com>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@....com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
Lee Smith <Lee.Smith@....com>,
Alexander Deucher <Alexander.Deucher@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
enh <enh@...gle.com>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Christian Koenig <Christian.Koenig@....com>,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 02/16] arm64: untag user pointers in access_ok and
__uaccess_mask_ptr
Hi Catalin,
...
> ---------8<----------------
> From 7c624777a4e545522dec1b34e60f0229cb2bd59f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 13:03:38 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] arm64: Introduce prctl() options to control the tagged user
> addresses ABI
>
> It is not desirable to relax the ABI to allow tagged user addresses into
> the kernel indiscriminately. This patch introduces a prctl() interface
> for enabling or disabling the tagged ABI with a global sysctl control
> for preventing applications from enabling the relaxed ABI (meant for
> testing user-space prctl() return error checking without reconfiguring
> the kernel). The ABI properties are inherited by threads of the same
> application and fork()'ed children but cleared on execve().
>
> The PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL will be expanded in the future to handle
> MTE-specific settings like imprecise vs precise exceptions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h | 6 +++
> arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h | 1 +
> arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h | 5 ++-
> arch/arm64/kernel/process.c | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/uapi/linux/prctl.h | 5 +++
> kernel/sys.c | 16 +++++++
> 6 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h
> index fcd0e691b1ea..fee457456aa8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h
> @@ -307,6 +307,12 @@ extern void __init minsigstksz_setup(void);
> /* PR_PAC_RESET_KEYS prctl */
> #define PAC_RESET_KEYS(tsk, arg) ptrauth_prctl_reset_keys(tsk, arg)
>
> +/* PR_TAGGED_ADDR prctl */
> +long set_tagged_addr_ctrl(unsigned long arg);
> +long get_tagged_addr_ctrl(void);
> +#define SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL(arg) set_tagged_addr_ctrl(arg)
> +#define GET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL() get_tagged_addr_ctrl()
> +
> /*
> * For CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_STACKLEAK
> *
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h
> index c285d1ce7186..7263d4c973ce 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h
> @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ void arch_release_task_struct(struct task_struct *tsk);
> #define TIF_SVE 23 /* Scalable Vector Extension in use */
> #define TIF_SVE_VL_INHERIT 24 /* Inherit sve_vl_onexec across exec */
> #define TIF_SSBD 25 /* Wants SSB mitigation */
> +#define TIF_TAGGED_ADDR 26
>
Can you please put a comment here?
> #define _TIF_SIGPENDING (1 << TIF_SIGPENDING)
> #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED (1 << TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> index 9164ecb5feca..995b9ea11a89 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> @@ -73,6 +73,9 @@ static inline unsigned long __range_ok(const void __user *addr, unsigned long si
> {
> unsigned long ret, limit = current_thread_info()->addr_limit;
>
> + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_TAGGED_ADDR))
> + addr = untagged_addr(addr);
> +
> __chk_user_ptr(addr);
> asm volatile(
> // A + B <= C + 1 for all A,B,C, in four easy steps:
> @@ -94,7 +97,7 @@ static inline unsigned long __range_ok(const void __user *addr, unsigned long si
> return ret;
> }
>
> -#define access_ok(addr, size) __range_ok(untagged_addr(addr), size)
> +#define access_ok(addr, size) __range_ok(addr, size)
> #define user_addr_max get_fs
>> #define _ASM_EXTABLE(from, to) \
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> index 3767fb21a5b8..69d0be1fc708 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> #include <linux/mm.h>
> #include <linux/stddef.h>
> +#include <linux/sysctl.h>
> #include <linux/unistd.h>
> #include <linux/user.h>
> #include <linux/delay.h>
> @@ -323,6 +324,7 @@ void flush_thread(void)
> fpsimd_flush_thread();
> tls_thread_flush();
> flush_ptrace_hw_breakpoint(current);
> + clear_thread_flag(TIF_TAGGED_ADDR);
Nit: in line we the other functions in thread_flush we could have something like
"tagged_addr_thread_flush", maybe inlined.
> }
>
> void release_thread(struct task_struct *dead_task)
> @@ -552,3 +554,68 @@ void arch_setup_new_exec(void)
>
> ptrauth_thread_init_user(current);
> }
> +
> +/*
> + * Control the relaxed ABI allowing tagged user addresses into the kernel.
> + */
> +static unsigned int tagged_addr_prctl_allowed = 1;
> +
> +long set_tagged_addr_ctrl(unsigned long arg)
> +{
> + if (!tagged_addr_prctl_allowed)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + if (is_compat_task())
> + return -EINVAL;
> + if (arg & ~PR_TAGGED_ADDR_ENABLE)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (arg & PR_TAGGED_ADDR_ENABLE)
> + set_thread_flag(TIF_TAGGED_ADDR);
> + else
> + clear_thread_flag(TIF_TAGGED_ADDR);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +long get_tagged_addr_ctrl(void)
> +{
> + if (!tagged_addr_prctl_allowed)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + if (is_compat_task())
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_TAGGED_ADDR))
> + return PR_TAGGED_ADDR_ENABLE;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Global sysctl to disable the tagged user addresses support. This control
> + * only prevents the tagged address ABI enabling via prctl() and does not
> + * disable it for tasks that already opted in to the relaxed ABI.
> + */
> +static int zero;
> +static int one = 1;
> +
> +static struct ctl_table tagged_addr_sysctl_table[] = {
> + {
> + .procname = "tagged_addr",
> + .mode = 0644,
> + .data = &tagged_addr_prctl_allowed,
> + .maxlen = sizeof(int),
> + .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
> + .extra1 = &zero,
> + .extra2 = &one,
> + },
> + { }
> +};
> +
> +static int __init tagged_addr_init(void)
> +{
> + if (!register_sysctl("abi", tagged_addr_sysctl_table))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +core_initcall(tagged_addr_init);
process.c seems already a bit "overcrowded". Probably we could move all the
tagged_addr features in a separate file. What do you think? It would make easier
the implementation of mte as well going forward.
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/prctl.h b/include/uapi/linux/prctl.h
> index 094bb03b9cc2..2e927b3e9d6c 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/prctl.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/prctl.h
> @@ -229,4 +229,9 @@ struct prctl_mm_map {
> # define PR_PAC_APDBKEY (1UL << 3)
> # define PR_PAC_APGAKEY (1UL << 4)
>
> +/* Tagged user address controls for arm64 */
> +#define PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL 55
> +#define PR_GET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL 56
> +# define PR_TAGGED_ADDR_ENABLE (1UL << 0)
> +
> #endif /* _LINUX_PRCTL_H */
> diff --git a/kernel/sys.c b/kernel/sys.c
> index 2969304c29fe..ec48396b4943 100644
> --- a/kernel/sys.c
> +++ b/kernel/sys.c
> @@ -124,6 +124,12 @@
> #ifndef PAC_RESET_KEYS
> # define PAC_RESET_KEYS(a, b) (-EINVAL)
> #endif
> +#ifndef SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL
> +# define SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL(a) (-EINVAL)
> +#endif
> +#ifndef GET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL
> +# define GET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL() (-EINVAL)
> +#endif
>
> /*
> * this is where the system-wide overflow UID and GID are defined, for
> @@ -2492,6 +2498,16 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(prctl, int, option, unsigned long, arg2, unsigned long, arg3,
> return -EINVAL;
> error = PAC_RESET_KEYS(me, arg2);
> break;
> + case PR_SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL:
> + if (arg3 || arg4 || arg5)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + error = SET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL(arg2);
> + break;
> + case PR_GET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL:
> + if (arg2 || arg3 || arg4 || arg5)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + error = GET_TAGGED_ADDR_CTRL();
> + break;
Why do we need two prctl here? We could have only one and use arg2 as set/get
and arg3 as a parameter. What do you think?
> default:
> error = -EINVAL;
> break;
>
--
Regards,
Vincenzo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists