linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usercopy: Skip HIGHMEM page checking

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: <20190917163606.GU29434@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 17 Sep 2019 09:36:06 -0700
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usercopy: Skip HIGHMEM page checking

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 08:05:00PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 05:32:09PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 02:32:56PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > When running on a system with >512MB RAM with a 32-bit kernel built with:
> > > 
> > > 	CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL=y
> > > 	CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
> > > 	CONFIG_HARDENED_USERCOPY=y
> > > 
> > > all execve()s will fail due to argv copying into kmap()ed pages, and on
> > > usercopy checking the calls ultimately of virt_to_page() will be looking
> > > for "bad" kmap (highmem) pointers due to CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL=y:
> > 
> > I don't understand why you want to skip the check.  We must not cross a
> > page boundary of a kmapped page.
> 
> That requires a new test which hasn't existed before. First I need to
> fix the bug, and then we can add a new test and get that into -next,
> etc.

I suppose that depends where your baseline is.  From the perspective
of "before Kees added this feature", your point of view makes sense.
>From the perspective of "what's been shipping for the last six months",
this is a case which has simply not happened before now (or we'd've seen
a bug report).

I don't think you need to change anything for check_page_span() to do
the right thing.  The rodata/data/bss checks will all fall through.
If the copy has the correct bounds, the 'wholly within one base page'
check will pass and it'll return.  If the copy does span a page,
the virt_to_head_page(end) call will return something bogus, then the
PageReserved and CMA test will cause the usercopy_abort() test to fail.

So I think your first patch is the right patch.