linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lkdtm: Test KUAP directional user access unlocks on powerpc

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 31 Jan 2020 18:01:32 +1100
From:   Russell Currey <ruscur@...sell.cc>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>, keescook@...omium.org,
        mpe@...erman.id.au
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dja@...ens.net,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lkdtm: Test KUAP directional user access unlocks on
 powerpc

On Fri, 2020-01-31 at 07:58 +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> 
> Le 31/01/2020 à 07:53, Russell Currey a écrit :
> > On Fri, 2020-01-31 at 07:44 +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > > Le 31/01/2020 à 06:31, Russell Currey a écrit :
> > > > +	pr_info("attempting bad read at %px with write
> > > > allowed\n",
> > > > ptr);
> > > > +	tmp = *ptr;
> > > > +	tmp += 0xc0dec0de;
> > > > +	prevent_write_to_user(ptr, sizeof(unsigned long));
> > > 
> > > Does it work ? I would have thought that if the read fails the
> > > process
> > > will die and the following test won't be performed.
> > 
> > Correct, the ACCESS_USERSPACE test does the same thing.  Splitting
> > this
> > into separate R and W tests makes sense, even if it is unlikely
> > that
> > one would be broken without the other.
> > 
> 
> Or once we are using user_access_begin() stuff, we can use 
> unsafe_put_user() and unsafe_get_user() which should return an error 
> instead of killing the caller.

Even better, and thanks for your work on all this stuff.

- Russell

> 
> Christophe