linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] kgdb: Add NOKPROBE labels on the trap handler functions

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: <CAD=FV=UBMa4pt7Xg2sKXHdjo6tVaQWBQFtT_aoDJ+Xt1HrPD+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 17 Jul 2020 15:39:58 -0700
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:     Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Patch Tracking <patches@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] kgdb: Add NOKPROBE labels on the trap handler functions

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 8:20 AM Daniel Thompson
<daniel.thompson@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> Currently kgdb honours the kprobe blocklist but doesn't place its own
> trap handling code on the list. Add labels to discourage attempting to
> use kgdb to debug itself.
>
> These changes do not make it impossible to provoke recursive trapping
> since they do not cover all the calls that can be made on kgdb's entry
> logic. However going much further whilst we are sharing the kprobe
> blocklist risks reducing the capabilities of kprobe and this would be a
> bad trade off (especially so given kgdb's users are currently conditioned
> to avoid recursive traps).
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
> ---
>  kernel/debug/debug_core.c | 8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

I could just be missing something, but...

I understand not adding "NOKPROBE_SYMBOL" to generic kernel functions
that kgdb happens to call, but I'm not quite sure I understand why all
of the kdb / kgdb code itself shouldn't be in the blocklist.  I
certainly don't object to the functions you added to the blocklist, I
guess I'm must trying to understand why it's a bad idea to add more or
how you came up with the list of functions that you did.