All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Sami Tolvanen' <samitolvanen@google.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	"Nick Desaulniers" <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Joao Moreira <joao@overdrivepizza.com>,
	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>,
	"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"llvm@lists.linux.dev" <llvm@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v2 20/21] x86: Add support for CONFIG_CFI_CLANG
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 21:32:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <19b3e040302d4d8aa240eee43427dfaa@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABCJKueo+cw1DHH6N2dUjD-U7OKqmkJUyimm0ychv1drt5U9Rg@mail.gmail.com>

From: Sami Tolvanen
> Sent: 16 May 2022 17:39
> 
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 1:32 AM David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Sami Tolvanen
> > > Sent: 13 May 2022 21:22
> > >
> > > With CONFIG_CFI_CLANG, the compiler injects a type preamble
> > > immediately before each function and a check to validate the target
> > > function type before indirect calls:
> > >
> > >   ; type preamble
> > >   __cfi_function:
> > >     int3
> > >     int3
> > >     mov <id>, %eax
> >
> > Interesting - since this code can't be executed there is no
> > point adding an instruction 'prefix' to the 32bit constant.
> 
> The reason to embed the type into an instruction is to avoid the need
> to special case objtool's instruction decoder.
> 
> > >     int3
> > >     int3
> > >   function:
> > >     ...
> > >   ; indirect call check
> > >     cmpl    <id>, -6(%r11)
> > >     je      .Ltmp1
> > >     ud2
> > >   .Ltmp1:
> > >     call    __x86_indirect_thunk_r11
> > >
> > > Define the __CFI_TYPE helper macro for manual type annotations in
> > > assembly code, add error handling for the CFI ud2 traps, and allow
> > > CONFIG_CFI_CLANG to be selected on x86_64.
> > >
> > ...
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * The compiler generates the following instruction sequence
> > > +      * for indirect call checks:
> > > +      *
> > > +      *   cmpl    <id>, -6(%reg)     ; 7 bytes
> >
> > If the <id> is between -128 and 127 then an 8bit constant
> > (sign extended) might be used.
> > Possibly the compiler forces the assembler to generate the
> > long form.
> >
> > There could also be a REX prefix.
> > That will break any code that tries to use %reg.
> 
> The compiler always generates this specific instruction sequence.

Yes, but there are several ways to encode 'cmpl imm,-6(reg)'.
Firstly you can use '81 /7 imm32' or '83 /7 imm8' where imm8 is sign extended.
(the /7 1/7/index_reg for a signed 8 bit offset).
But that only works for the original 32bit registers.
For the 64bit r8 to r15 an extra REX prefix is required.
That makes the instruction 8 bytes (if it needs a full 32bit immediate).

So if the register is %r11 there is an extra REX byte.
If the <id> is a hash and happens to be between -128 and 127
then there are three less bytes.

So decoding from regs->ip - 0 isn't always going to give
you the start of the instruction.

> 
> > > +      *   je      .Ltmp1             ; 2 bytes
> > > +      *   ud2                        ; <- addr
> > > +      *   .Ltmp1:
> > > +      *
> > > +      * Both the type and the target address can be decoded from the
> > > +      * cmpl instruction.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (copy_from_kernel_nofault(buffer, (void *)regs->ip - 9, MAX_INSN_SIZE))
> > > +             return;
> > > +     if (insn_decode_kernel(&insn, buffer))
> > > +             return;
> > > +     if (insn.opcode.value != 0x81 || X86_MODRM_REG(insn.modrm.value) != 7)
> > > +             return;
> >
> > Since you are looking for a very specific opcode why bother
> > calling insn_decode_kernel() - just check for the required (masked)
> > byte values.
> 
> Because I need to decode both the immediate value and the register
> from that instruction.
> 
> > > +
> > > +     *type = insn.immediate.value;
> > > +
> > > +     offset = insn_get_modrm_rm_off(&insn, regs);
> >
> > Given the expected instruction, isn't that -6 ??
> 
> No, this is the register offset.

Hmmm.... strange function name...
> 
> > > +     if (offset < 0)
> > > +             return;
> > > +
> > > +     *target = *(unsigned long *)((void *)regs + offset);
> >
> > WTF is that calculating??
> 
> It's reading the register value from pt_regs.
> 
> Sami

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Sami Tolvanen' <samitolvanen@google.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	"Nick Desaulniers" <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Joao Moreira <joao@overdrivepizza.com>,
	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>,
	"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"llvm@lists.linux.dev" <llvm@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v2 20/21] x86: Add support for CONFIG_CFI_CLANG
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 21:32:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <19b3e040302d4d8aa240eee43427dfaa@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABCJKueo+cw1DHH6N2dUjD-U7OKqmkJUyimm0ychv1drt5U9Rg@mail.gmail.com>

From: Sami Tolvanen
> Sent: 16 May 2022 17:39
> 
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 1:32 AM David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Sami Tolvanen
> > > Sent: 13 May 2022 21:22
> > >
> > > With CONFIG_CFI_CLANG, the compiler injects a type preamble
> > > immediately before each function and a check to validate the target
> > > function type before indirect calls:
> > >
> > >   ; type preamble
> > >   __cfi_function:
> > >     int3
> > >     int3
> > >     mov <id>, %eax
> >
> > Interesting - since this code can't be executed there is no
> > point adding an instruction 'prefix' to the 32bit constant.
> 
> The reason to embed the type into an instruction is to avoid the need
> to special case objtool's instruction decoder.
> 
> > >     int3
> > >     int3
> > >   function:
> > >     ...
> > >   ; indirect call check
> > >     cmpl    <id>, -6(%r11)
> > >     je      .Ltmp1
> > >     ud2
> > >   .Ltmp1:
> > >     call    __x86_indirect_thunk_r11
> > >
> > > Define the __CFI_TYPE helper macro for manual type annotations in
> > > assembly code, add error handling for the CFI ud2 traps, and allow
> > > CONFIG_CFI_CLANG to be selected on x86_64.
> > >
> > ...
> > > +
> > > +     /*
> > > +      * The compiler generates the following instruction sequence
> > > +      * for indirect call checks:
> > > +      *
> > > +      *   cmpl    <id>, -6(%reg)     ; 7 bytes
> >
> > If the <id> is between -128 and 127 then an 8bit constant
> > (sign extended) might be used.
> > Possibly the compiler forces the assembler to generate the
> > long form.
> >
> > There could also be a REX prefix.
> > That will break any code that tries to use %reg.
> 
> The compiler always generates this specific instruction sequence.

Yes, but there are several ways to encode 'cmpl imm,-6(reg)'.
Firstly you can use '81 /7 imm32' or '83 /7 imm8' where imm8 is sign extended.
(the /7 1/7/index_reg for a signed 8 bit offset).
But that only works for the original 32bit registers.
For the 64bit r8 to r15 an extra REX prefix is required.
That makes the instruction 8 bytes (if it needs a full 32bit immediate).

So if the register is %r11 there is an extra REX byte.
If the <id> is a hash and happens to be between -128 and 127
then there are three less bytes.

So decoding from regs->ip - 0 isn't always going to give
you the start of the instruction.

> 
> > > +      *   je      .Ltmp1             ; 2 bytes
> > > +      *   ud2                        ; <- addr
> > > +      *   .Ltmp1:
> > > +      *
> > > +      * Both the type and the target address can be decoded from the
> > > +      * cmpl instruction.
> > > +      */
> > > +     if (copy_from_kernel_nofault(buffer, (void *)regs->ip - 9, MAX_INSN_SIZE))
> > > +             return;
> > > +     if (insn_decode_kernel(&insn, buffer))
> > > +             return;
> > > +     if (insn.opcode.value != 0x81 || X86_MODRM_REG(insn.modrm.value) != 7)
> > > +             return;
> >
> > Since you are looking for a very specific opcode why bother
> > calling insn_decode_kernel() - just check for the required (masked)
> > byte values.
> 
> Because I need to decode both the immediate value and the register
> from that instruction.
> 
> > > +
> > > +     *type = insn.immediate.value;
> > > +
> > > +     offset = insn_get_modrm_rm_off(&insn, regs);
> >
> > Given the expected instruction, isn't that -6 ??
> 
> No, this is the register offset.

Hmmm.... strange function name...
> 
> > > +     if (offset < 0)
> > > +             return;
> > > +
> > > +     *target = *(unsigned long *)((void *)regs + offset);
> >
> > WTF is that calculating??
> 
> It's reading the register value from pt_regs.
> 
> Sami

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-16 21:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 174+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-13 20:21 [RFC PATCH v2 00/21] KCFI support Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/21] efi/libstub: Filter out CC_FLAGS_CFI Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:42   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:42     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 15:44     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 15:44       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 02/21] arm64/vdso: " Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:42   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:42     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 03/21] kallsyms: Ignore __kcfi_typeid_ Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:43   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:43     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 04/21] cfi: Remove CONFIG_CFI_CLANG_SHADOW Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:43   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:43     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 05/21] cfi: Drop __CFI_ADDRESSABLE Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:44   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:44     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 06/21] cfi: Switch to -fsanitize=kcfi Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:46   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:46     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-15  3:41   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-15  3:41     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 07/21] cfi: Add type helper macros Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:49   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:49     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 12:28     ` Rasmus Villemoes
2022-05-16 12:28       ` Rasmus Villemoes
2022-05-16 16:23       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 16:23         ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 16:04     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 16:04       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 08/21] psci: Fix the function type for psci_initcall_t Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:50   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:50     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 15:44     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 15:44       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17  8:47   ` Mark Rutland
2022-05-17  8:47     ` Mark Rutland
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 09/21] arm64: Add types to indirect called assembly functions Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:50   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:50     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 10/21] arm64: Add CFI error handling Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:51   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:51     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 16:24     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 16:24       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 11/21] arm64: Drop unneeded __nocfi attributes Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:54   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:54     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 16:28     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 16:28       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 12/21] treewide: Drop function_nocfi Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:54   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:54     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 13/21] treewide: Drop WARN_ON_FUNCTION_MISMATCH Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:54   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:54     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 14/21] treewide: Drop __cficanonical Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:56   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:56     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 16:32     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 16:32       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 15/21] objtool: Don't warn about __cfi_ preambles falling through Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:56   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:56     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 16/21] x86/tools/relocs: Ignore __kcfi_typeid_ relocations Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:57   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:57     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 17/21] x86: Add types to indirectly called assembly functions Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:58   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:58     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 18/21] x86/purgatory: Disable CFI Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:58   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:58     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 19/21] x86/vdso: " Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 21:58   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 21:58     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 20/21] x86: Add support for CONFIG_CFI_CLANG Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 22:02   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 22:02     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 18:57     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 18:57       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-15  3:19   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-15  3:19     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16  8:32   ` David Laight
2022-05-16  8:32     ` David Laight
2022-05-16 16:39     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 16:39       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 21:32       ` David Laight [this message]
2022-05-16 21:32         ` David Laight
2022-05-16 21:44         ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 21:44           ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 22:03           ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 22:03             ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17  6:44             ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17  6:44               ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17 20:36               ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17 20:36                 ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17  7:56             ` David Laight
2022-05-17  7:56               ` David Laight
2022-05-16  9:54   ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16  9:54     ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 11:45     ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 11:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 12:58       ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 12:58         ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-20 13:49         ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-05-20 13:49           ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-05-16 17:15     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 17:15       ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 18:30       ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 18:30         ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 19:39         ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 19:39           ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 20:37           ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-16 20:37             ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-25 20:02             ` Kees Cook
2022-05-25 20:02               ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 22:59         ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 22:59           ` Kees Cook
2022-05-17  8:05           ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17  8:05             ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17  8:32             ` Joao Moreira
2022-05-17  8:32               ` Joao Moreira
2022-05-17  8:40             ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17  8:40               ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17  8:48               ` David Laight
2022-05-17  8:48                 ` David Laight
2022-05-17  9:38                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17  9:38                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-13 20:21 ` [RFC PATCH v2 21/21] init: Drop __nocfi from __init Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-13 20:21   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-14 22:03   ` Kees Cook
2022-05-14 22:03     ` Kees Cook
2022-05-16 17:16     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 17:16       ` Sami Tolvanen
     [not found] ` <CA+icZUWr+-HjMvY1VZf+nqjTadxSTDciux0Y5Y-+p_j4o7CmXg@mail.gmail.com>
2022-05-16 17:57   ` [RFC PATCH v2 00/21] KCFI support Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-16 17:57     ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17  7:33     ` Sedat Dilek
2022-05-17  7:33       ` Sedat Dilek
2022-05-17 18:49       ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-05-17 18:49         ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-05-19  9:01         ` Sedat Dilek
2022-05-19  9:01           ` Sedat Dilek
2022-05-19 20:26           ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-05-19 20:26             ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-05-19 20:41             ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-19 20:41               ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17  8:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17  8:57   ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-17 20:25   ` Sami Tolvanen
2022-05-17 20:25     ` Sami Tolvanen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=19b3e040302d4d8aa240eee43427dfaa@AcuMS.aculab.com \
    --to=david.laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=joao@overdrivepizza.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
    --cc=sedat.dilek@gmail.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.