linux-kernel - Re: [musl] Re: [PATCH v8 00/38] arm64/gcs: Provide support for GCS in userspace

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: <CAMe9rOoVNZ+q0MAcpW-HDuptD8WDEDddZjOycy7G=P48nJ=DSA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2024 07:05:49 -0800
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, "dalias@...c.org" <dalias@...c.org>, 
	"Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, 
	"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"suzuki.poulose@....com" <suzuki.poulose@....com>, "Szabolcs.Nagy@....com" <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>, 
	"musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>, 
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, 
	"kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev" <kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev>, "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>, 
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>, "oliver.upton@...ux.dev" <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>, 
	"palmer@...belt.com" <palmer@...belt.com>, "debug@...osinc.com" <debug@...osinc.com>, 
	"aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, "shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>, 
	"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "maz@...nel.org" <maz@...nel.org>, "oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>, 
	"fweimer@...hat.com" <fweimer@...hat.com>, "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>, 
	"james.morse@....com" <james.morse@....com>, "ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, 
	"will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>, "brauner@...nel.org" <brauner@...nel.org>, 
	"hjl.tools@...il.com" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, 
	"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"paul.walmsley@...ive.com" <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, "ardb@...nel.org" <ardb@...nel.org>, 
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, 
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, 
	"thiago.bauermann@...aro.org" <thiago.bauermann@...aro.org>, 
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "sorear@...tmail.com" <sorear@...tmail.com>, 
	"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [musl] Re: [PATCH v8 00/38] arm64/gcs: Provide support for GCS in userspace

On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 6:57 AM Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> wrote:
>
> * Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> [2024-02-21 17:36:12 +0000]:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 09:58:01AM -0500, dalias@...c.org wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 01:53:10PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 08:27:37PM -0500, dalias@...c.org wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 12:35:48AM +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> >
> > > > > > (INCSSP, RSTORSSP, etc). These are a collection of instructions that
> > > > > > allow limited control of the SSP. When shadow stack gets disabled,
> > > > > > these suddenly turn into #UD generating instructions. So any other
> > > > > > threads executing those instructions when shadow stack got disabled
> > > > > > would be in for a nasty surprise.
> >
> > > > > This is the kernel's problem if that's happening. It should be
> > > > > trapping these and returning immediately like a NOP if shadow stack
> > > > > has been disabled, not generating SIGILL.
> >
> > > > I'm not sure that's going to work out well, all it takes is some code
> > > > that's looking at the shadow stack and expecting something to happen as
> > > > a result of the instructions it's executing and we run into trouble  A
> >
> > > I said NOP but there's no reason it strictly needs to be a NOP. It
> > > could instead do something reasonable to convey the state of racing
> > > with shadow stack being disabled.
> >
> > This feels like it's getting complicated and I fear it may be an uphill
> > struggle to get such code merged, at least for arm64.  My instinct is
>
> the aarch64 behaviour is already nop
> for gcs instructions when gcs is disabled.
> the isa was designed so async disable is
> possible.
>
> only x86 linux would have to emulate this.

On Linux/x86, normal instructions are used to update SSP after
checking SHSTK is enabled.   If SHSTK is disabled in between,
program behavior may be undefined.

-- 
H.J.