linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] crypto: arm64/sha: fix function types

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, 14 Nov 2019 10:21:46 -0800
From:   Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc:     Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        linux-crypto <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: arm64/sha: fix function types

On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 1:45 AM Ard Biesheuvel
<ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 22:28, Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 12:04 PM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 02:30:46PM -0800, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> > > > Declare assembly functions with the expected function type
> > > > instead of casting pointers in C to avoid type mismatch failures
> > > > with Control-Flow Integrity (CFI) checking.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/arm64/crypto/sha1-ce-glue.c   | 12 +++++-------
> > > >  arch/arm64/crypto/sha2-ce-glue.c   | 26 +++++++++++---------------
> > > >  arch/arm64/crypto/sha256-glue.c    | 30 ++++++++++++------------------
> > > >  arch/arm64/crypto/sha512-ce-glue.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
> > > >  arch/arm64/crypto/sha512-glue.c    | 13 +++++--------
> > > >  5 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/crypto/sha1-ce-glue.c b/arch/arm64/crypto/sha1-ce-glue.c
> > > > index bdc1b6d7aff7..3153a9bbb683 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/crypto/sha1-ce-glue.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/crypto/sha1-ce-glue.c
> > > > @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ struct sha1_ce_state {
> > > >       u32                     finalize;
> > > >  };
> > > >
> > > > -asmlinkage void sha1_ce_transform(struct sha1_ce_state *sst, u8 const *src,
> > > > +asmlinkage void sha1_ce_transform(struct sha1_state *sst, u8 const *src,
> > > >                                 int blocks);
> > >
> > > Please update the comments in the corresponding assembly files too.
> > >
> > > Also, this change doesn't really make sense because the assembly functions still
> > > expect struct sha1_ce_state, and they access sha1_ce_state::finalize which is
> > > not present in struct sha1_state.  There should either be wrapper functions that
> > > explicitly do the cast from sha1_state to sha1_ce_state, or there should be
> > > comments in the assembly files that very clearly explain that although the
> > > function prototype takes sha1_state, it's really assumed to be a sha1_ce_state.
> >
> > Agreed, this needs a comment explaining the type mismatch. I'm also
> > fine with using wrapper functions and explicitly casting the
> > parameters instead of changing function declarations. Herbert, Ard,
> > any preferences?
> >
>
> I guess the former would be cleaner, using container_of() rather than
> a blind cast to make the code more self-documenting. The extra branch
> shouldn't really matter.

Sure, using container_of() sounds like a better option, I'll use that
in v2. Thanks!

Sami