linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] x86/topology changes for v5.3

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: <00e7f454c2d531cdc6033cd6e3761e8a0d60c2e0.camel@mengyan1223.wang>
Date:   Wed, 10 Jul 2019 22:44:33 +0800
From:   Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...gyan1223.wang>
To:     Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Bob Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
        Erik Schmauss <erik.schmauss@...el.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        xry111@...gyan1223.wang
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/topology changes for v5.3

On 2019-07-10 16:22 +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jul 2019, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > If we mark the key as RO after init, and then try and modify the key to
> > link module usage sites, things might go bang as described.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> > index 27d7864e7252..5bf7a8354da2 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> > @@ -366,7 +366,7 @@ static __always_inline void setup_umip(struct
> > cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> >  	cr4_clear_bits(X86_CR4_UMIP);
> >  }
> >  
> > -DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE_RO(cr_pinning);
> > +DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(cr_pinning);
> 
> Good catch, I guess that is going to fix it.

Yes it works.

> At the same time though, it sort of destroys the original intent of Kees' 
> patch, right? The exploits will just have to call static_key_disable() 
> prior to calling native_write_cr4() again, and the protection is gone.

I think I should do some study and try to understand the full story of Kees'
change...
-- 
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...gyan1223.wang>
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University