linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86,module: Detect CRn and DRn manipulation

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: <2b0dc69c-f7f9-985d-fc40-8b7bbd927e4f@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Apr 2020 18:15:48 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sean.j.christopherson@...el.com,
        mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org,
        kenny@...ix.com, jeyu@...nel.org, rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk,
        fenghua.yu@...el.com, xiaoyao.li@...el.com, nadav.amit@...il.com,
        thellstrom@...are.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jannh@...gle.com,
        keescook@...omium.org, David.Laight@...lab.com,
        dcovelli@...are.com, mhiramat@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86,module: Detect CRn and DRn manipulation

On 08/04/20 17:46, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 05:44:19PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 09:27:26AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>> On Tue, 07 Apr 2020 13:02:40 +0200
>>> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> +		if (insn_is_mov_CRn(&insn) || insn_is_mov_DRn(&insn)) {
>>>> +			pr_err("Module writes to CRn or DRn, please use the proper accessors: %s\n", mod->name);
>>>> +			return -ENOEXEC;
>>>> +		}
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Something like this should be done for all modules, not just out of tree
>>> modules.
>>
>> I'm all for it; but people were worried scanning all modules was too
>> expensive (I don't really believe it is, module loading just can't be a
>> hot-path). Also, in-tree modules are audited a lot more than out of tree
>> magic voodoo crap.
> 
> Scanning all modules seems safer.  While we're at it - can be move the
> kvm bits using VMX to be always in the core kernel and just forbid
> modules from using those instructions entirely?

I suppose we could use PVOPS-style patching for the more
performance-critical cases, but VMREAD/VMWRITE does not seem like a
particularly bad thing to allow modules and VMLAUNCH/VMRESUME have very
peculiar calling conventions around them.

However, I wouldn't mind it if VMCLEAR/VMPTRLD and the associated kdump
cleanup code were moved to core kernel code.

Paolo