linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] Break heap spraying needed for exploiting use-after-free

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: <e72ac0d5-80b1-b8a3-2436-cc027f81fefa@linux.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Aug 2020 12:08:47 +0300
From:   Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        notify@...nel.org, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] Break heap spraying needed for exploiting
 use-after-free

On 15.08.2020 19:39, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 06:19:20PM +0300, Alexander Popov wrote:
>> I've found an easy way to break heap spraying for use-after-free
>> exploitation. I simply extracted slab freelist quarantine from KASAN
>> functionality and called it CONFIG_SLAB_QUARANTINE. Please see patch 1.
> 
> Ah yeah, good idea. :)
> 
>> [...]
>> I did a brief performance evaluation of this feature.
>>
>> 1. Memory consumption. KASAN quarantine uses 1/32 of the memory.
>> CONFIG_SLAB_QUARANTINE disabled:
>>   # free -m
>>                 total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
>>   Mem:           1987          39        1862          10          86        1907
>>   Swap:             0           0           0
>> CONFIG_SLAB_QUARANTINE enabled:
>>   # free -m
>>                 total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
>>   Mem:           1987         140        1760          10          87        1805
>>   Swap:             0           0           0
> 
> 1/32 of memory doesn't seem too bad for someone interested in this defense.

This can be configured. Quote from linux/mm/kasan/quarantine.c:
/*
 * The fraction of physical memory the quarantine is allowed to occupy.
 * Quarantine doesn't support memory shrinker with SLAB allocator, so we keep
 * the ratio low to avoid OOM.
 */
#define QUARANTINE_FRACTION 32

>> 2. Performance penalty. I used `hackbench -s 256 -l 200 -g 15 -f 25 -P`.
>> CONFIG_SLAB_QUARANTINE disabled (x86_64, CONFIG_SLUB):
>>   Times: 3.088, 3.103, 3.068, 3.103, 3.107
>>   Mean: 3.0938
>>   Standard deviation: 0.0144
>> CONFIG_SLAB_QUARANTINE enabled (x86_64, CONFIG_SLUB):
>>   Times: 3.303, 3.329, 3.356, 3.314, 3.292
>>   Mean: 3.3188 (+7.3%)
>>   Standard deviation: 0.0223
> 
> That's rather painful, but hackbench can produce some big deltas given
> it can be an unrealistic workload for most systems. I'd be curious to
> see the "building a kernel" timings, which tends to be much more
> realistic for "busy system" without hammering one particular subsystem
> (though it's a bit VFS heavy, obviously).

I have new results.

CPU: Intel Core i7-6500U CPU @ 2.50GHz

Test: time make O=../build_out/defconfig/ -j2

CONFIG_SLAB_QUARANTINE disabled:
  Times: 10m52.978s 10m50.161s 10m45.601s
  Mean: 649.58s
  Standard deviation: 3.04

CONFIG_SLAB_QUARANTINE enabled:
  Times: 10m56.256s 10m51.919s 10m47.903s
  Mean: 652.026s (+0,38%)
  Standard deviation: 3.41

This test shows much lower performance penalty.

More ideas of tests?

Best regards,
Alexander