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: <20210204175659.GC21303@willie-the-truck>
Date:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 17:57:00 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer@...il.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, andreyknvl@...gle.com, ardb@...nel.org,
        aryabinin@...tuozzo.com, broonie@...nel.org,
        catalin.marinas@....com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
        dvyukov@...gle.com, glider@...gle.com, gustavoars@...nel.org,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, lecopzer.chen@...iatek.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux@...ck-us.net, robin.murphy@....com, rppt@...nel.org,
        tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com, vincenzo.frascino@....com,
        yj.chiang@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: kasan: support CONFIG_KASAN_VMALLOC

On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 11:53:46PM +0800, Lecopzer Chen wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 09, 2021 at 06:32:48PM +0800, Lecopzer Chen wrote:
> > > Linux supports KAsan for VMALLOC since commit 3c5c3cfb9ef4da9
> > > ("kasan: support backing vmalloc space with real shadow memory")
> > > 
> > > Acroding to how x86 ported it [1], they early allocated p4d and pgd,
> > > but in arm64 I just simulate how KAsan supports MODULES_VADDR in arm64
> > > by not to populate the vmalloc area except for kimg address.
> > 
> > The one thing I've failed to grok from your series is how you deal with
> > vmalloc allocations where the shadow overlaps with the shadow which has
> > already been allocated for the kernel image. Please can you explain?
> 
> 
> The most key point is we don't map anything in the vmalloc shadow address.
> So we don't care where the kernel image locate inside vmalloc area.
> 
>   kasan_map_populate(kimg_shadow_start, kimg_shadow_end,...)
> 
> Kernel image was populated with real mapping in its shadow address.
> I `bypass' the whole shadow of vmalloc area, the only place you can find
> about vmalloc_shadow is
> 	kasan_populate_early_shadow((void *)vmalloc_shadow_end,
> 			(void *)KASAN_SHADOW_END);
> 
> 	-----------  vmalloc_shadow_start
>  |           |
>  |           | 
>  |           | <= non-mapping
>  |           |
>  |           |
>  |-----------|
>  |///////////|<- kimage shadow with page table mapping.
>  |-----------|
>  |           |
>  |           | <= non-mapping
>  |           |
>  ------------- vmalloc_shadow_end
>  |00000000000|
>  |00000000000| <= Zero shadow
>  |00000000000|
>  ------------- KASAN_SHADOW_END
> 
> vmalloc shadow will be mapped 'ondemend', see kasan_populate_vmalloc()
> in mm/vmalloc.c in detail.
> So the shadow of vmalloc will be allocated later if anyone use its va.

Indeed, but the question I'm asking is what happens when an on-demand shadow
allocation from vmalloc overlaps with the shadow that we allocated early for
the kernel image?

Sounds like I have to go and read the code...

Will

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ