From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F3FEC433E0 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 23:30:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CF9120823 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 23:30:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="MpBbNEwc" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730786AbgEUXa3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2020 19:30:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55170 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730558AbgEUXa1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2020 19:30:27 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x542.google.com (mail-pg1-x542.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::542]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79503C061A0E for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 16:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x542.google.com with SMTP id n11so4076929pgl.9 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 16:30:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=1gibyxiWx0QNF1j9zPlChAHDNDwaEmxS/M++y57RUrs=; b=MpBbNEwcm5wRraAV5OiblA2zPdqD9KNWPoAHUgqKM8Rbst+M/JjT04I9uUUH1EALHs lW+yRfivRRJqil+IgM0QapLJey39Kg/2mP1L3qwPliX5LQPUjzvp6TxCDx0umxNp19gB nFFRmUzPGKWjr17uv2KuvHYtLQgkR9/n6ZRqg= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=1gibyxiWx0QNF1j9zPlChAHDNDwaEmxS/M++y57RUrs=; b=n0l9wDyP+w44DGcSrr+ba7Ebj0EYL0A2yxCHfprVPXFOkVobOal1dTHPPsXPT0hGdg 97/BBMn3vKag70i/qgd/gPWCg+pp2Y5dzjk3aRfwALF2ZcNyU9BUKSPSq+BSyxhfCCf6 zkUjBnOqMLLdd2eN7tX+aogeH8t4poM5AtI+YrflcKWi7xi6CacNmPvmdR4OQNEHtRlE q7ueWqw+GPn9J2pLub4roZ07UKyBWBU7mbzidvs9ErnIcixSxTMSEoL24BQutk/9cNlT xQgZ0aJEqtM34gcPirwDpYvsDy72Y23Gqlc7V57f9CfNrL4L9GM0JJWw0pC8KhaOreaC 4phA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531bNqfcRjer/oW8JHPYdGX93DKxd8/6dv/MLGyU4wPHzjm/zEAU uBmsyBK3eV7sq4L+pBdVL+iJzA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy9tCvODJaSjshfgmC7fdO80oHfJyQWMgbloCJ5mYHG3BMqD79HqFicR3fubN7UfR62DwQKIw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:546:: with SMTP id 67mr11688886pgf.364.1590103825857; Thu, 21 May 2020 16:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e19sm5144403pfn.17.2020.05.21.16.30.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 21 May 2020 16:30:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 16:30:23 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Kristen Carlson Accardi , mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, arjan@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] Function Granular KASLR Message-ID: <202005211604.86AE1C2@keescook> References: <20200521165641.15940-1-kristen@linux.intel.com> <87367sudpl.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87367sudpl.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 12:26:30AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > I understand how this is supposed to work, but I fail to find an > explanation how all of this is preserving the text subsections we have, > i.e. .kprobes.text, .entry.text ...? I had the same question when I first started looking at earlier versions of this series! :) > I assume that the functions in these subsections are reshuffled within > their own randomized address space so that __xxx_text_start and > __xxx_text_end markers still make sense, right? No, but perhaps in the future. Right now, they are entirely ignored and left untouched. The current series only looks at the sections produced by -ffunction-sections, which is to say only things named ".text.$thing" (e.g. ".text.func1", ".text.func2"). Since the "special" text sections in the kernel are named ".$thing.text" (specifically to avoid other long-standing linker logic that does similar .text.* pattern matches) they get ignored by FGKASLR right now too. Even more specifically, they're ignored because all of these special _input_ sections are actually manually collected by the linker script into the ".text" _output_ section, which FGKASLR ignores -- it can only randomize the final output sections (and has no basic block visibility into the section contents), so everything in .text is untouched. Because these special sections are collapsed into the single .text output section is why we've needed the __$thing_start and __$thing_end symbols manually constructed by the linker scripts: we lose input section location/size details once the linker collects them into an output section. > I'm surely too tired to figure it out from the patches, but you really > want to explain that very detailed for mere mortals who are not deep > into this magic as you are. Yeah, it's worth calling out, especially since it's an area of future work -- I think if we can move the special sections out of .text into their own output sections that can get randomized and we'll have section position/size information available without the manual ..._start/_end symbols. But this will require work with the compiler and linker to get what's needed relative to -ffunction-sections, teach the kernel about the new way of getting _start/_end, etc etc. So, before any of that, just .text.* is a good first step, and after that I think next would be getting .text randomized relative to the other .text.* sections (IIUC, it is entirely untouched currently, so only the standard KASLR base offset moves it around). Only after that do we start poking around trying to munge the special section contents (which requires use solving a few problems simultaneously). :) -- Kees Cook