linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] implement KASLR for powerpc/fsl

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <473e276e-ed72-b75b-9797-7845ee27db88@huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Mar 2020 11:22:16 +0800
From:   Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com>
To:     Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>, Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>,
        <mpe@...erman.id.au>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        <diana.craciun@....com>, <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
        <benh@...nel.crashing.org>, <paulus@...ba.org>,
        <npiggin@...il.com>, <keescook@...omium.org>,
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <zhaohongjiang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] implement KASLR for powerpc/fsl_booke/64



在 2020/3/5 5:21, Scott Wood 写道:
> On Wed, 2020-02-26 at 18:16 +1100, Daniel Axtens wrote:
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>>> This is a try to implement KASLR for Freescale BookE64 which is based on
>>> my earlier implementation for Freescale BookE32:
>>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/?series=131718
>>>
>>> The implementation for Freescale BookE64 is similar as BookE32. One
>>> difference is that Freescale BookE64 set up a TLB mapping of 1G during
>>> booting. Another difference is that ppc64 needs the kernel to be
>>> 64K-aligned. So we can randomize the kernel in this 1G mapping and make
>>> it 64K-aligned. This can save some code to creat another TLB map at
>>> early boot. The disadvantage is that we only have about 1G/64K = 16384
>>> slots to put the kernel in.
>>>
>>>      KERNELBASE
>>>
>>>            64K                     |--> kernel <--|
>>>             |                      |              |
>>>          +--+--+--+    +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+    +--+--+
>>>          |  |  |  |....|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |....|  |  |
>>>          +--+--+--+    +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+    +--+--+
>>>          |                         |                        1G
>>>          |----->   offset    <-----|
>>>
>>>                                kernstart_virt_addr
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if the slot numbers is enough or the design has any
>>> defects. If you have some better ideas, I would be happy to hear that.
>>>
>>> Thank you all.
>>>
>>
>> Are you making any attempt to hide kernel address leaks in this series?
>> I've just been looking at the stackdump code just now, and it directly
>> prints link registers and stack pointers, which is probably enough to
>> determine the kernel base address:
>>
>>                    SPs:               LRs:             %pS pointer
>> [    0.424506] [c0000000de403970] [c000000001fc0458] dump_stack+0xfc/0x154
>> (unreliable)
>> [    0.424593] [c0000000de4039c0] [c000000000267eec] panic+0x258/0x5ac
>> [    0.424659] [c0000000de403a60] [c0000000024d7a00]
>> mount_block_root+0x634/0x7c0
>> [    0.424734] [c0000000de403be0] [c0000000024d8100]
>> prepare_namespace+0x1ec/0x23c
>> [    0.424811] [c0000000de403c60] [c0000000024d7010]
>> kernel_init_freeable+0x804/0x880
>>
>> git grep \\\"REG\\\" arch/powerpc shows a few other uses like this, all
>> in process.c or in xmon.
>>
>> Maybe replacing the REG format string in KASLR mode would be sufficient?
> 
> Whatever we decide to do here, it's not book3e-specific so it should be
> considered separately from these patches.
> 

OK, I will continue to work with this series.

> -Scott
> 
> 
> 
> .
>