linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] stack: Optionally randomize kernel stack offset each syscall

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]

Message-ID: <202006221604.871B13DE3@keescook>
Date:   Mon, 22 Jun 2020 16:07:11 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] stack: Optionally randomize kernel stack offset
 each syscall

On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 06:56:15PM -0400, Arvind Sankar wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 12:31:44PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > +
> > +#define add_random_kstack_offset() do {					\
> > +	if (static_branch_maybe(CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_KSTACK_OFFSET_DEFAULT,	\
> > +				&randomize_kstack_offset)) {		\
> > +		u32 offset = this_cpu_read(kstack_offset);		\
> > +		u8 *ptr = __builtin_alloca(offset & 0x3FF);		\
> > +		asm volatile("" : "=m"(*ptr));				\
> > +	}								\
> > +} while (0)
> 
> This feels a little fragile. ptr doesn't escape the block, so the
> compiler is free to restore the stack immediately after this block. In
> fact, given that all you've said is that the asm modifies *ptr, but
> nothing uses that output, the compiler could eliminate the whole thing,
> no?
> 
> https://godbolt.org/z/HT43F5
> 
> gcc restores the stack immediately, if no function calls come after it.
> 
> clang completely eliminates the code if no function calls come after.

nothing uses the stack in your example. And adding a barrier (which is
what the "=m" is, doesn't change it.

> I'm not sure why function calls should affect it, though, given that
> those functions can't possibly access ptr or the memory it points to.

It seems to work correctly:
https://godbolt.org/z/c3W5BW

-- 
Kees Cook