From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz> To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, kaslr: propagate base load address calculation Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 00:07:12 +0100 (CET) [thread overview] Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1502110001480.10719@pobox.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jJzs9Ve9so96f6n-=JxP+GR3xYFQYBtZ=mUm+Q7bMAgBw@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, 10 Feb 2015, Kees Cook wrote: > > Instead of fixing the logic in module.c, this patch takes more generic > > aproach, and exposes __KERNEL_OFFSET macro, which calculates the real > > offset that has been established by choose_kernel_location() during boot. > > This can be used later by other kernel code as well (such as, but not > > limited to, live patching). > > > > OOPS offset dumper and module loader are converted to that they make use > > of this macro as well. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz> > > Ah, yes! This is a good clean up. Thanks! I do see, however, one > corner case remaining: kASLR randomized to 0 offset. This will force > module ASLR off, which I think is a mistake. Ah, right, good point. I thought that zero-randomization is not possible, but looking closely, it is. > Perhaps we need to export the kaslr state as a separate item to be > checked directly, instead of using __KERNEL_OFFSET? I wanted to avoid sharing variables between compressed loader and the rest of the kernel, but if that's what you prefer, I can do it. Alternatively, we can forbid zero-sized randomization, and always enforce at least some minimal offset to be chosen in case zero would be chosen. I think that'd be even more bulletproof for any future changes, as it automatically clearly and immediately distinguishes between 'disabled' and 'randomized' states, and the loss of entropy is negligible. Let me know which of the two you'd prefer; I'll then send you a corresponding patch, as I don't have a strong opinion either way. Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz> To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, kaslr: propagate base load address calculation Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 00:07:12 +0100 (CET) [thread overview] Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1502110001480.10719@pobox.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jJzs9Ve9so96f6n-=JxP+GR3xYFQYBtZ=mUm+Q7bMAgBw@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, 10 Feb 2015, Kees Cook wrote: > > Instead of fixing the logic in module.c, this patch takes more generic > > aproach, and exposes __KERNEL_OFFSET macro, which calculates the real > > offset that has been established by choose_kernel_location() during boot. > > This can be used later by other kernel code as well (such as, but not > > limited to, live patching). > > > > OOPS offset dumper and module loader are converted to that they make use > > of this macro as well. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz> > > Ah, yes! This is a good clean up. Thanks! I do see, however, one > corner case remaining: kASLR randomized to 0 offset. This will force > module ASLR off, which I think is a mistake. Ah, right, good point. I thought that zero-randomization is not possible, but looking closely, it is. > Perhaps we need to export the kaslr state as a separate item to be > checked directly, instead of using __KERNEL_OFFSET? I wanted to avoid sharing variables between compressed loader and the rest of the kernel, but if that's what you prefer, I can do it. Alternatively, we can forbid zero-sized randomization, and always enforce at least some minimal offset to be chosen in case zero would be chosen. I think that'd be even more bulletproof for any future changes, as it automatically clearly and immediately distinguishes between 'disabled' and 'randomized' states, and the loss of entropy is negligible. Let me know which of the two you'd prefer; I'll then send you a corresponding patch, as I don't have a strong opinion either way. Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-10 23:07 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2015-02-10 13:17 [PATCH] x86, kaslr: propagate base load address calculation Jiri Kosina 2015-02-10 13:17 ` Jiri Kosina 2015-02-10 17:25 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-10 17:25 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-10 23:07 ` Jiri Kosina [this message] 2015-02-10 23:07 ` Jiri Kosina 2015-02-10 23:13 ` Jiri Kosina 2015-02-10 23:13 ` Jiri Kosina 2015-02-13 15:04 ` [PATCH v2] " Jiri Kosina 2015-02-13 15:04 ` Jiri Kosina 2015-02-13 17:49 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-13 17:49 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-13 22:20 ` Jiri Kosina 2015-02-13 22:20 ` Jiri Kosina 2015-02-13 23:25 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-13 23:25 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-16 11:55 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-16 11:55 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-16 19:27 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-16 19:27 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-16 19:42 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-16 19:42 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-17 10:44 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-17 10:44 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-17 12:21 ` Jiri Kosina 2015-02-17 12:21 ` Jiri Kosina 2015-02-17 12:39 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-17 12:39 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-17 16:45 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-17 16:45 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-17 22:31 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-17 22:31 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-18 3:33 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-18 3:33 ` Kees Cook 2015-02-18 8:32 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-18 8:32 ` Borislav Petkov 2015-02-18 10:46 ` Jiri Kosina 2015-02-18 10:46 ` Jiri Kosina
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=alpine.LNX.2.00.1502110001480.10719@pobox.suse.cz \ --to=jkosina@suse.cz \ --cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \ --cc=keescook@chromium.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=live-patching@vger.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: linkBe 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.