linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] x86/mm for 6.4

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]

Date:   Fri, 16 Jun 2023 10:47:15 +0200
From:   Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
To:     torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:     dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org, x86@...nel.org,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/mm for 6.4

Hi Linus,

>  static bool ex_handler_uaccess(const struct exception_table_entry *fixup,
> -			       struct pt_regs *regs, int trapnr)
> +			       struct pt_regs *regs, int trapnr,
> +			       unsigned long fault_address)
>  {
> -	WARN_ONCE(trapnr == X86_TRAP_GP, "General protection fault in user access. Non-canonical address?");
> +	WARN_ONCE(trapnr == X86_TRAP_GP && !gp_fault_address_ok(fault_address),
> +		"General protection fault in user access. Non-canonical address?");
>  	return ex_handler_default(fixup, regs);
>  }

Shouldn't ex_handler_copy() be fixed in the same way?
Looks like it's still possible for a tagged userspace address to be passed to it and trigger a warning.

Alex