All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: "Masahiro Yamada" <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
	"James Morris" <jmorris@namei.org>,
	"Maciej Żenczykowski" <maze@google.com>,
	"Nick Desaulniers" <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] security: allow using Clang's zero initialization for stack variables
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2020 19:16:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAG_fn=V0w2OShK+iQODkwdPoG094VpiPkhZ8O_F37m=g2XWwug@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202006141000.B93DF245@keescook>

On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 7:04 PM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 04:45:34PM +0200, glider@google.com wrote:
> > In addition to -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern (used by
> > CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL now) Clang also supports zero initialization for
> > locals enabled by -ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero.
> > The future of this flag is still being debated, see
> > https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45497
> > Right now it is guarded by another flag,
> > -enable-trivial-auto-var-init-zero-knowing-it-will-be-removed-from-clang,
> > which means it may not be supported by future Clang releases.
> > Another possible resolution is that -ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero will
> > persist (as certain users have already started depending on it), but the
> > name of the guard flag will change.
> >
> > In the meantime, zero initialization has proven itself as a good
> > production mitigation measure against uninitialized locals. Unlike
> > pattern initialization, which has a higher chance of triggering existing
> > bugs, zero initialization provides safe defaults for strings, pointers,
> > indexes, and sizes. On the other hand, pattern initialization remains
> > safer for return values.
> > Performance-wise, the difference between pattern and zero initialization
> > is usually negligible, although the generated code for zero
> > initialization is more compact.
> >
> > The proposed config, CONFIG_USE_CLANG_ZERO_INITIALIZATION, makes
> > CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL use zero initialization if the corresponding flags
> > are supported by Clang.
> >
> > Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> > Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
> > ---
> >  Makefile                   | 15 ++++++++++++++-
> >  security/Kconfig.hardening | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> > index fd31992bf918..2860bad7e39a 100644
> > --- a/Makefile
> > +++ b/Makefile
> > @@ -802,9 +802,22 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS    += -fomit-frame-pointer
> >  endif
> >  endif
> >
> > -# Initialize all stack variables with a pattern, if desired.
> > +# Initialize all stack variables, if desired.
> >  ifdef CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL
> > +
> > +# Use pattern initialization by default.
> > +ifndef CONFIG_USE_CLANG_ZERO_INITIALIZATION
> >  KBUILD_CFLAGS        += -ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern
> > +else
> > +
> > +ifdef CONFIG_CC_HAS_AUTO_VAR_ZERO_INIT
> > +# Future support for zero initialization is still being debated, see
> > +# https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45497. These flags are subject to being
> > +# renamed or dropped.
> > +KBUILD_CFLAGS        += -ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero -enable-trivial-auto-var-init-zero-knowing-it-will-be-removed-from-clang
> > +endif
> > +
> > +endif
> >  endif
>
> I'd prefer this be split instead of built as a nested if (i.e. entirely
> control section via the Kconfig -- see below).
>
> >
> >  DEBUG_CFLAGS := $(call cc-option, -fno-var-tracking-assignments)
> > diff --git a/security/Kconfig.hardening b/security/Kconfig.hardening
> > index af4c979b38ee..299d27c6d78c 100644
> > --- a/security/Kconfig.hardening
> > +++ b/security/Kconfig.hardening
> > @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@ menu "Memory initialization"
> >  config CC_HAS_AUTO_VAR_INIT
> >       def_bool $(cc-option,-ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern)
> >
> > +config CC_HAS_AUTO_VAR_ZERO_INIT
> > +     def_bool $(cc-option,-ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero -enable-trivial-auto-var-init-zero-knowing-it-will-be-removed-from-clang)
> > +
>
> I'd like to be more specific here. Let's rename CC_HAS_AUTO_VAR_INIT to
> CC_HAS_AUTO_VAR_INIT_PATTERN, and change the other to
> CC_HAS_AUTO_VAR_INIT_ZERO (they then both match the word order of the
> option, and the thing that changes is the last word).
>
> >  choice
> >       prompt "Initialize kernel stack variables at function entry"
> >       default GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF_ALL if COMPILE_TEST && GCC_PLUGINS
> > @@ -100,6 +103,19 @@ choice
> >
> >  endchoice
> >
> > +config USE_CLANG_ZERO_INITIALIZATION
> > +     bool "Use Clang's zero initialization for local variables"
> > +     depends on CC_HAS_AUTO_VAR_ZERO_INIT
> > +     depends on INIT_STACK_ALL
> > +     help
> > +       If set, uses zeros instead of 0xAA to initialize local variables in
> > +       INIT_STACK_ALL. Zeroing the stack provides safer defaults for strings,
> > +       pointers, indexes, and sizes. The downsides are less-safe defaults for
> > +       return values, and exposing fewer bugs where the underlying code
> > +       relies on zero initialization.
> > +       The corresponding flag isn't officially supported by Clang and may
> > +       sooner or later go away or get renamed.
> > +
>
> Similarly, I'd like to rename INIT_STACK_ALL to INIT_STACK_ALL_PATTERN
> and then add INIT_STACK_ALL_ZERO.

What are the policies regarding keeping the existing config flags?
Don't we need to preserve INIT_STACK_ALL?

  reply	other threads:[~2020-06-14 17:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-14 14:45 [PATCH] [RFC] security: allow using Clang's zero initialization for stack variables glider
2020-06-14 17:04 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-14 17:16   ` Alexander Potapenko [this message]
2020-06-14 18:43     ` Kees Cook

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='CAG_fn=V0w2OShK+iQODkwdPoG094VpiPkhZ8O_F37m=g2XWwug@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=glider@google.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maze@google.com \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
    /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.