linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 11/16] x86/purgatory: Disable CFI

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: <CABCJKudRDcwfkSK205Pb__hzLWQPUFhbjUtFPbctdPAycSOKQw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:30:46 -0700
From:   Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/16] x86/purgatory: Disable CFI

On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 1:02 PM Nick Desaulniers
<ndesaulniers@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 12:11 PM Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Disable CONFIG_CFI_CLANG for the stand-alone purgatory.ro.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
>
> I kind of prefer the existing convention that has explicit guards on
> specific configs (ie. CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER, CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR,
> CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR_STRONG, CONFIG_RETPOLINE); it's more obvious
> which configs may introduce which flags that are problematic. This
> patch is ok as is, but it kind of makes this Makefile more
> inconsistent.  I would prefer we had the explicit checks.

The Makefile does already use DISABLE_STACKLEAK_PLUGIN in a similar
way, but I don't have a strong preference here. I can move this into
an ifdef if it makes things cleaner.

> Does CFI actually do any instrumentation in these object files? I
> guess issues in purgatory cause silent/hard to debug kexec failures?

The compiler shouldn't add any actual CFI instrumentation here right
now, but I would prefer to avoid issues in future.

Sami