linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/13] x86: Secure Launch kernel early boot stub

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: <a4f999cf-733e-d5a9-254e-3829439dcb2d@oracle.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:36:29 -0400
From:   Ross Philipson <ross.philipson@...cle.com>
To:     Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>,
        Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, dpsmith@...rtussolutions.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com,
        luto@...capital.net, trenchboot-devel@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/13] x86: Secure Launch kernel early boot stub

On 10/21/20 12:18 PM, Arvind Sankar wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 05:28:33PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 01:18:22PM -0400, Arvind Sankar wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:51:53PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 04:51:51PM -0400, Arvind Sankar wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:26:54PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am discussing with Ross the other option. We can create
>>>>>> .rodata.mle_header section and put it at fixed offset as
>>>>>> kernel_info is. So, we would have, e.g.:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> arch/x86/boot/compressed/vmlinux.lds.S:
>>>>>>         .rodata.kernel_info KERNEL_INFO_OFFSET : {
>>>>>>                 *(.rodata.kernel_info)
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>         ASSERT(ABSOLUTE(kernel_info) == KERNEL_INFO_OFFSET, "kernel_info at bad address!")
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         .rodata.mle_header MLE_HEADER_OFFSET : {
>>>>>>                 *(.rodata.mle_header)
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>         ASSERT(ABSOLUTE(mle_header) == MLE_HEADER_OFFSET, "mle_header at bad address!")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> arch/x86/boot/compressed/sl_stub.S:
>>>>>> #define mleh_rva(X) (((X) - mle_header) + MLE_HEADER_OFFSET)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         .section ".rodata.mle_header", "a"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SYM_DATA_START(mle_header)
>>>>>>         .long   0x9082ac5a    /* UUID0 */
>>>>>>         .long   0x74a7476f    /* UUID1 */
>>>>>>         .long   0xa2555c0f    /* UUID2 */
>>>>>>         .long   0x42b651cb    /* UUID3 */
>>>>>>         .long   0x00000034    /* MLE header size */
>>>>>>         .long   0x00020002    /* MLE version 2.2 */
>>>>>>         .long   mleh_rva(sl_stub_entry)    /* Linear entry point of MLE (virt. address) */
>>>>>>         .long   0x00000000    /* First valid page of MLE */
>>>>>>         .long   0x00000000    /* Offset within binary of first byte of MLE */
>>>>>>         .long   0x00000000    /* Offset within binary of last byte + 1 of MLE */
>>>>>>         .long   0x00000223    /* Bit vector of MLE-supported capabilities */
>>>>>>         .long   0x00000000    /* Starting linear address of command line (unused) */
>>>>>>         .long   0x00000000    /* Ending linear address of command line (unused) */
>>>>>> SYM_DATA_END(mle_header)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course MLE_HEADER_OFFSET has to be defined as a constant somewhere.
>>>>>> Anyway, is it acceptable?
>>>>
>>>> What do you think about my MLE_HEADER_OFFSET and related stuff proposal?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm wondering if it would be easier to just allow relocations in these
>>> special "header" sections. I need to check how easy/hard it is to do
>>> that without triggering linker warnings.
>>
>> Ross and I still bouncing some ideas. We came to the conclusion that
>> putting mle_header into kernel .rodata.kernel_info section or even
>> arch/x86/boot/compressed/kernel_info.S file would be the easiest thing
>> to do at this point. Of course I would suggest some renaming too. E.g.
>> .rodata.kernel_info to .rodata.kernel_headers, etc. Does it make sense
>> for you?
>>
>> Daniel
> 
> I haven't been able to come up with any different options that don't
> require post-processing of the kernel image. Allowing relocations in
> specific sections seems to not be possible with lld, and anyway would
> require the fields to be 64-bit sized so it doesn't really help.
> 
> Putting mle_header into kernel_info seems like a reasonable thing to me,
> and if you do that, putting it into kernel_info.S would seem to be
> necessary?  Would you also have a fixed field with the offset of the

That seems like a reasonable place for it to go.

> mle_header from kernel_info?  That seems nicer than having the
> bootloader scan the variable data for magic strings.

Yes kernel_info will have a field to the offset of the mle_header. I
agree that would be nicer.

Thanks
Ross

>