linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 22/27] binfmt_elf: Extract .note.gnu.property from an ELF file

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]

Message-ID: <20190613132623.GA28398@e103592.cambridge.arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:26:23 +0100
From:   Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
To:     Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
Cc:     Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>,
        "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        Vedvyas Shanbhogue <vedvyas.shanbhogue@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 22/27] binfmt_elf: Extract .note.gnu.property from an
 ELF file

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 12:04:01PM -0700, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-06-12 at 10:32 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 12:31:34PM -0700, Yu-cheng Yu wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2019-06-11 at 12:41 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 07:24:43PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > > > * Yu-cheng Yu:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > To me, looking at PT_GNU_PROPERTY and not trying to support anything
> > > > > > is a
> > > > > > logical choice.  And it breaks only a limited set of toolchains.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I will simplify the parser and leave this patch as-is for anyone who
> > > > > > wants
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > back-port.  Are there any objections or concerns?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 does not use PT_GNU_PROPERTY and is probably
> > > > > the largest collection of CET-enabled binaries that exists today.
> > > > 
> > > > For clarity, RHEL is actively parsing these properties today?
> > > > 
> > > > > My hope was that we would backport the upstream kernel patches for CET,
> > > > > port the glibc dynamic loader to the new kernel interface, and be ready
> > > > > to run with CET enabled in principle (except that porting userspace
> > > > > libraries such as OpenSSL has not really started upstream, so many
> > > > > processes where CET is particularly desirable will still run without
> > > > > it).
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm not sure if it is a good idea to port the legacy support if it's not
> > > > > part of the mainline kernel because it comes awfully close to creating
> > > > > our own private ABI.
> > > > 
> > > > I guess we can aim to factor things so that PT_NOTE scanning is
> > > > available as a fallback on arches for which the absence of
> > > > PT_GNU_PROPERTY is not authoritative.
> > > 
> > > We can probably check PT_GNU_PROPERTY first, and fallback (based on ld-linux
> > > version?) to PT_NOTE scanning?
> > 
> > For arm64, we can check for PT_GNU_PROPERTY and then give up
> > unconditionally.
> > 
> > For x86, we would fall back to PT_NOTE scanning, but this will add a bit
> > of cost to binaries that don't have NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0.  The ld.so
> > version doesn't tell you what ELF ABI a given executable conforms to.
> > 
> > Since this sounds like it's largely a distro-specific issue, maybe there
> > could be a Kconfig option to turn the fallback PT_NOTE scanning on?
> 
> Yes, I will make it a Kconfig option.

OK, that works for me.  This would also help keep the PT_NOTE scanning
separate from the rest of the code.

For arm64 we could then unconditionally select/deselect that option,
where x86 could leave it configurable either way.

Cheers
---Dave