From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@linux.com>
Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com"
<kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm/slub.c: add a naive detection of double free or corruption
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 12:11:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jK5j2pSVca9XGJhJ6pnF04p7S=K1Z432nzG2y4LfKhYjg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c86c66c3-29d8-0b04-b4d1-f9f8192d8c4a@linux.com>
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Alexander Popov <alex.popov@linux.com> wrote:
> Hello Christopher,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> On 17.07.2017 21:04, Christopher Lameter wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 07:45:07PM +0300, Alexander Popov wrote:
>>>> Add an assertion similar to "fasttop" check in GNU C Library allocator:
>>>> an object added to a singly linked freelist should not point to itself.
>>>> That helps to detect some double free errors (e.g. CVE-2017-2636) without
>>>> slub_debug and KASAN. Testing with hackbench doesn't show any noticeable
>>>> performance penalty.
>>>
>>>> {
>>>> + BUG_ON(object == fp); /* naive detection of double free or corruption */
>>>> *(void **)(object + s->offset) = fp;
>>>> }
>>>
>>> Is BUG() the best response to this situation? If it's a corruption, then
>>> yes, but if we spot a double-free, then surely we should WARN() and return
>>> without doing anything?
>>
>> The double free debug checking already does the same thing in a more
>> thourough way (this one only checks if the last free was the same
>> address). So its duplicating a check that already exists.
>
> Yes, absolutely. Enabled slub_debug (or KASAN with its quarantine) can detect
> more double-free errors. But it introduces much bigger performance penalty and
> it's disabled by default.
>
>> However, this one is always on.
>
> Yes, I would propose to have this relatively cheap check enabled by default. I
> think it will block a good share of double-free errors. Currently it's really
> easy to turn such a double-free into use-after-free and exploit it, since, as I
> wrote, next two kmalloc() calls return the same address. So we could make
> exploiting harder for a relatively low price.
>
> Christopher, if I change BUG_ON() to VM_BUG_ON(), it will be disabled by default
> again, right?
Let's merge this with the proposed CONFIG_FREELIST_HARDENED, then the
performance change is behind a config, and we gain the rest of the
freelist protections at the same time:
http://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2017/07/06/1
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
--
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:[~2017-07-17 19:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-17 16:45 [PATCH 1/1] mm/slub.c: add a naive detection of double free or corruption Alexander Popov
2017-07-17 16:57 ` Christopher Lameter
2017-07-17 17:54 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-07-17 18:04 ` Christopher Lameter
2017-07-17 19:01 ` Alexander Popov
2017-07-17 19:11 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2017-07-18 19:56 ` Alexander Popov
2017-07-18 20:04 ` Kees Cook
2017-07-19 8:38 ` Alexander Popov
2017-07-19 14:02 ` Christopher Lameter
2017-07-18 14:57 ` Christopher Lameter
2017-07-17 18:23 ` Alexander Popov
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='CAGXu5jK5j2pSVca9XGJhJ6pnF04p7S=K1Z432nzG2y4LfKhYjg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.popov@linux.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).