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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2203031330530.704@pobox.suse.cz> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2022 13:33:06 +0100 (CET) From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz> To: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com> cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "joao@...rdrivepizza.com" <joao@...rdrivepizza.com>, "hjl.tools@...il.com" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, "jpoimboe@...hat.com" <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "ndesaulniers@...gle.com" <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>, "samitolvanen@...gle.com" <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>, "alyssa.milburn@...el.com" <alyssa.milburn@...el.com>, "rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>, "mhiramat@...nel.org" <mhiramat@...nel.org>, "alexei.starovoitov@...il.com" <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 33/39] objtool: Add IBT/ENDBR decoding On Thu, 3 Mar 2022, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 03/03/2022 10:53, Miroslav Benes wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > >> Decode ENDBR instructions and WARN about NOTRACK prefixes. > > I guess it has been already mentioned somewhere, but could you explain > > NOTRACK prefix here, please? If I understand it right, it disables IBT for > > the indirect branch instruction meaning that its target does not have to > > start with ENDBR? > > CET-IBT has loads of get-out clauses. The NOTRACK prefix is one; the > legacy code bitmap (implicit NOTRACK for whole libraries) is another. > > And yes - the purpose of NOTRACK is to exempt a specific indirect branch > from checks. > > GCC can emit NOTRACK'd calls in some cases when e.g. the programmer > launders a function pointer through (void *), or when > __attribute__((no_cf_check)) is used explicitly. > > > Each of the get-out clauses has separate enable bits, as each of them > reduces security. In this series, Linux sets MSR_S_CET.ENDBR_EN but > specifically does not set NOTRACK_EN, so NOTRACK prefixes will be > ignored and suffer #CP if encountered. Thanks for the explanation. I would be nice to include it somewhere so that it is not lost. Miroslav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists