linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/kaslr: try process e820 entries if can not get suitable regions from efi

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: <CAMj1kXHJ62ib6zeRuqEKoASP1244naWijw9s7Ofhc8_g2K7WNA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Jan 2021 09:54:52 +0100
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To:     Lin Feng <linfeng23@...wei.com>,
        Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        weidong.huang@...wei.com, hogan.wang@...wei.com,
        wangxinxin.wang@...wei.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/kaslr: try process e820 entries if can not get
 suitable regions from efi

(cc Arvind)

On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 at 09:54, Lin Feng <linfeng23@...wei.com> wrote:
>
> On efi64 x86_64 system, the EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY regions will not
> be mapped when making EFI runtime calls. So kexec-tools can not get
> these from /sys/firmware/efi/runtime-map. Then compressed boot os
> can not get suitable regions in process_efi_entries and print debug
> message as follow:
>         Physical KASLR disabled: no suitable memory region!
> To enable physical kaslr with kexec, call process_e820_entries when
> no suitable regions in efi memmaps.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lin Feng <linfeng23@...wei.com>
>
> ---
>
> I find a regular of Kernel code and data placement with kexec. It
> seems unsafe. The reason is showed above.
>
> I'm not familiar with efi firmware. I wonder if there are some risks
> to get regions according to e820 when there is no suitable region
> in efi memmaps.
> ---
>  arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> index b92fffbe761f..dbd7244b71aa 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> @@ -685,6 +685,7 @@ process_efi_entries(unsigned long minimum, unsigned long image_size)
>  {
>         struct efi_info *e = &boot_params->efi_info;
>         bool efi_mirror_found = false;
> +       bool efi_mem_region_found = false;
>         struct mem_vector region;
>         efi_memory_desc_t *md;
>         unsigned long pmap;
> @@ -742,12 +743,13 @@ process_efi_entries(unsigned long minimum, unsigned long image_size)
>                     !(md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_MORE_RELIABLE))
>                         continue;
>
> +               efi_mem_region_found = false;
>                 region.start = md->phys_addr;
>                 region.size = md->num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT;
>                 if (process_mem_region(&region, minimum, image_size))
>                         break;
>         }
> -       return true;
> +       return efi_mem_region_found;
>  }
>  #else
>  static inline bool
> --
> 2.23.0
>