[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANpmjNNm-4s16_KQ1_NqFN4XOESJh4_=33LHQzt+p4V0Cy=Xzw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 13:45:07 +0100
From: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
roman.fietze@...na.com, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] [v4] lib/vsprintf: no_hash_pointers prints all
addresses as unhashed
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 at 12:51, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Hi Timur,
>
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 5:17 PM Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org> wrote:
> > If the no_hash_pointers command line parameter is set, then
> > printk("%p") will print pointers as unhashed, which is useful for
> > debugging purposes. This change applies to any function that uses
> > vsprintf, such as print_hex_dump() and seq_buf_printf().
> >
> > A large warning message is displayed if this option is enabled.
> > Unhashed pointers expose kernel addresses, which can be a security
> > risk.
> >
> > Also update test_printf to skip the hashed pointer tests if the
> > command-line option is set.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>
>
> Thanks for your patch, which is now commit 5ead723a20e0447b
> ("lib/vsprintf: no_hash_pointers prints all addresses as unhashed") in
> v5.12-rc1.
>
> > --- a/lib/vsprintf.c
> > +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
> > @@ -2090,6 +2090,32 @@ char *fwnode_string(char *buf, char *end, struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
> > return widen_string(buf, buf - buf_start, end, spec);
> > }
> >
> > +/* Disable pointer hashing if requested */
> > +bool no_hash_pointers __ro_after_init;
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(no_hash_pointers);
> > +
> > +static int __init no_hash_pointers_enable(char *str)
> > +{
> > + no_hash_pointers = true;
> > +
> > + pr_warn("**********************************************************\n");
> > + pr_warn("** NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE **\n");
> > + pr_warn("** **\n");
> > + pr_warn("** This system shows unhashed kernel memory addresses **\n");
> > + pr_warn("** via the console, logs, and other interfaces. This **\n");
> > + pr_warn("** might reduce the security of your system. **\n");
> > + pr_warn("** **\n");
> > + pr_warn("** If you see this message and you are not debugging **\n");
> > + pr_warn("** the kernel, report this immediately to your system **\n");
> > + pr_warn("** administrator! **\n");
> > + pr_warn("** **\n");
> > + pr_warn("** NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE **\n");
> > + pr_warn("**********************************************************\n");
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +early_param("no_hash_pointers", no_hash_pointers_enable);
>
> While bloat-o-meter is not smart enough to notice the real size impact,
> this does add more than 500 bytes of string data to the kernel.
> Do we really need such a large message?
> Perhaps the whole no_hash_pointers machinery should be protected by
> "#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL"?
We recently stumbled across this, and it appears an increasing number
of production kernels enable CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL [1], so it likely
isn't the solution (we tried to use CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL in similar
way, and it wasn't reliable). Having no_hash_pointers frees us of
having to rely on CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL. (Perhaps somebody else will
comment, but I believe there were strong objections to making the
pointer hashing dependent on more Kconfig options.)
[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210223082043.1972742-1-elver@google.com
Would placing the strings into an __initconst array help?
Thanks,
-- Marco
Powered by blists - more mailing lists