All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-man <linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	"x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org"
	<x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] pkey.7: New page with overview of Memory Protection Keys
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:25:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKgNAkj8voeBsjERrRq+17L9rK5Vy_quv7Dm_7Hkmuvxfpw_iQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160913194438.A94997CE@ray>

Hello Dave,

On 13 September 2016 at 21:44, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>

Now that these system calls have hit mainline, are there any updates
to the 13 Sep series of man page patches?

Cheers,

Michael

> ---
>
>  b/man7/pkey.7 |  241 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 241 insertions(+)
>
> diff -puN /dev/null man7/pkey.7
> --- /dev/null   2016-08-25 11:43:25.028408991 -0700
> +++ b/man7/pkey.7       2016-09-13 12:42:56.171959285 -0700
> @@ -0,0 +1,241 @@
> +.\" Copyright (C) 2016 Intel Corporation
> +.\"
> +.\" %%%LICENSE_START(VERBATIM)
> +.\" Permission is granted to make and distribute verbatim copies of this
> +.\" manual provided the copyright notice and this permission notice are
> +.\" preserved on all copies.
> +.\"
> +.\" Permission is granted to copy and distribute modified versions of this
> +.\" manual under the conditions for verbatim copying, provided that the
> +.\" entire resulting derived work is distributed under the terms of a
> +.\" permission notice identical to this one.
> +.\"
> +.\" Since the Linux kernel and libraries are constantly changing, this
> +.\" manual page may be incorrect or out-of-date.  The author(s) assume no
> +.\" responsibility for errors or omissions, or for damages resulting from
> +.\" the use of the information contained herein.  The author(s) may not
> +.\" have taken the same level of care in the production of this manual,
> +.\" which is licensed free of charge, as they might when working
> +.\" professionally.
> +.\"
> +.\" Formatted or processed versions of this manual, if unaccompanied by
> +.\" the source, must acknowledge the copyright and authors of this work.
> +.\" %%%LICENSE_END
> +.\"
> +.TH PKEYS 7 2016-03-03 "Linux" "Linux Programmer's Manual"
> +.SH NAME
> +pkeys \- overview of Memory Protection Keys
> +.SH DESCRIPTION
> +Memory Protection Keys (pkeys) are an extension to existing
> +page-based memory permissions.
> +Normal page permissions using
> +page tables require expensive system calls and TLB invalidations
> +when changing permissions.
> +Memory Protection Keys provide a mechanism for changing
> +protections without requiring modification of the page tables on
> +every permission change.
> +
> +To use pkeys, software must first "tag" a page in the pagetables
> +with a pkey.
> +After this tag is in place, an application only has
> +to change the contents of a register in order to remove write
> +access, or all access to a tagged page.
> +
> +pkeys work in conjunction with the existing PROT_READ / PROT_WRITE /
> +PROT_EXEC permissions passed to system calls like
> +.BR mprotect (2)
> +and
> +.BR mmap (2),
> +but always act to further restrict these traditional permission
> +mechanisms.
> +
> +To use this feature, the processor must support it, and Linux
> +must contain support for the feature on a given processor.
> +As of early 2016 only future Intel x86 processors are supported,
> +and this hardware supports 16 protection keys in each process.
> +However, pkey 0 is used as the default key, so a maximum of 15
> +are available for actual application use.
> +The default key is assigned to any memory region for which a
> +pkey has not been explicitly assigned via
> +.BR pkey_mprotect(2).
> +
> +
> +Protection keys has the potential to add a layer of security and
> +reliability to applications.
> +But, it has not been primarily designed as
> +a security feature.
> +For instance, WRPKRU is a completely unprivileged
> +instruction, so pkeys are useless in any case that an attacker controls
> +the PKRU register or can execute arbitrary instructions.
> +
> +Applications should be very careful to ensure that they do not "leak"
> +protection keys.
> +For instance, before an application calls
> +.BR pkey_free(2)
> +the application should be sure that no memory has that pkey assigned.
> +If the application left the freed pkey assigned, a future user of
> +that pkey might inadvertently change the permissions of an unrelated
> +data structure which could impact security or stability.
> +The kernel currently allows in-use pkeys to have
> +.BR pkey_free(2)
> +called on them because it would have processor or memory performance
> +implications to perform the additional checks needed to disallow it.
> +Implementation of these checks is left up to applications.
> +Applications may implement these checks by searching the /proc
> +filesystem smaps file for memory regions with the pkey assigned.
> +More details can be found in
> +.BR proc(5)
> +
> +Any application wanting to use protection keys needs to be able
> +to function without them.
> +They might be unavailable because the hardware that the
> +application runs on does not support them, the kernel code does
> +not contain support, the kernel support has been disabled, or
> +because the keys have all been allocated, perhaps by a library
> +the application is using.
> +It is recommended that applications wanting to use protection
> +keys should simply call
> +.BR pkey_alloc(2)
> +instead of attempting to detect support for the
> +feature in any othee way.
> +
> +Although unnecessary, hardware support for protection keys may be
> +enumerated with the cpuid instruction.
> +Details on how to do this can be found in the Intel Software
> +Developers Manual.
> +The kernel performs this enumeration and exposes the information
> +in /proc/cpuinfo under the "flags" field.
> +"pku" in this field indicates hardware support for protection
> +keys and "ospke" indicates that the kernel contains and has
> +enabled protection keys support.
> +
> +Applications using threads and protection keys should be especially
> +careful.
> +Threads inherit the protection key rights of the parent at the time
> +of the
> +.BR clone (2),
> +system call.
> +Applications should either ensure that their own permissions are
> +appropriate for child threads at the time of
> +.BR clone (2)
> +being called, or ensure that each child thread can perform its
> +own initialization of protection key rights.
> +.SS Protection Keys system calls
> +The Linux kernel implements the following pkey-related system calls:
> +.BR pkey_mprotect (2),
> +.BR pkey_alloc (2),
> +and
> +.BR pkey_free (2) .
> +.SH NOTES
> +The Linux pkey system calls are available only if the kernel was
> +fonfigured and built with the
> +.BR CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
> +option.
> +.SH EXAMPLE
> +.PP
> +The program below allocates a page of memory with read/write
> +permissions via PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE.
> +It then writes some data to the memory and successfully reads it
> +back.
> +After that, it attempts to allocate a protection key and
> +disallows access by using the WRPKRU instruction.
> +It then tried to access
> +.BR buffer
> +which we now expect to cause a fatal signal to the application.
> +.in +4n
> +.nf
> +.RB "$" " ./a.out"
> +buffer contains: 73
> +about to read buffer again...
> +Segmentation fault (core dumped)
> +.fi
> +.in
> +.SS Program source
> +\&
> +.nf
> +#define _GNU_SOURCE
> +#include <unistd.h>
> +#include <sys/syscall.h>
> +#include <stdio.h>
> +#include <sys/mman.h>
> +
> +static inline void wrpkru(unsigned int pkru)
> +{
> +        unsigned int eax = pkru;
> +        unsigned int ecx = 0;
> +        unsigned int edx = 0;
> +
> +        asm volatile(".byte 0x0f,0x01,0xef\n\t"
> +                     : : "a" (eax), "c" (ecx), "d" (edx));
> +}
> +
> +int pkey_set(int pkey, unsigned long rights, unsigned long flags)
> +{
> +    unsigned int pkru = (rights << (2*pkey));
> +    return wrpkru(pkru);
> +}
> +
> +int pkey_mprotect(void *ptr, size_t size, unsigned long orig_prot, unsigned long pkey)
> +{
> +    return syscall(SYS_pkey_mprotect, ptr, size, orig_prot, pkey);
> +}
> +
> +int pkey_alloc(void)
> +{
> +    return syscall(SYS_pkey_alloc, 0, 0);
> +}
> +
> +int pkey_free(unsigned long pkey)
> +{
> +    return syscall(SYS_pkey_free, pkey);
> +}
> +
> +int main(void)
> +{
> +    int status;
> +    int pkey;
> +    int *buffer;
> +
> +    /* Allocate one page of memory: */
> +    buffer = mmap(NULL, getpagesize(), PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_ANONYMOUS|MAP_PRIVATE, -1, 0);
> +    if (buffer == MAP_FAILED)
> +           return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +    /* Put some random data in to the page (still OK to touch): */
> +    (*buffer) = __LINE__;
> +    printf("buffer contains: %d\\n", *buffer);
> +
> +    /* Allocate a protection key: */
> +    pkey = pkey_alloc();
> +    if (pkey < 0)
> +           return pkey;
> +
> +    /* Disable access to any memory with "pkey" set,
> +     * even though there is none right now. */
> +    status = pkey_set(pkey, PKEY_DISABLE_ACCESS, 0);
> +    if (status)
> +           return status;
> +
> +    /*
> +     * set the protection key on "buffer":
> +     * Note that it is still read/write as far as mprotect() is,
> +     * concerned and the previous pkey_set() overrides it.
> +     */
> +    status = pkey_mprotect(buffer, getpagesize(), PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, pkey);
> +    if (status)
> +           return status;
> +
> +    printf("about to read buffer again...\\n");
> +    /* this will crash, because we have disallowed access: */
> +    printf("buffer contains: %d\\n", *buffer);
> +
> +    status = pkey_free(pkey);
> +    if (status)
> +           return status;
> +
> +    return 0;
> +}
> +.SH SEE ALSO
> +.BR pkey_alloc (2),
> +.BR pkey_free (2),
> +.BR pkey_mprotect (2),
> _



-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-12  6:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-13 19:44 [PATCH 0/5] [RFCv5] add manpages for Memory Protection Keys Dave Hansen
2016-09-13 19:44 ` [PATCH 1/5] pkey.7: New page with overview of " Dave Hansen
2016-10-12  6:25   ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) [this message]
     [not found]     ` <CAKgNAkj8voeBsjERrRq+17L9rK5Vy_quv7Dm_7Hkmuvxfpw_iQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2016-10-12 16:41       ` Dave Hansen
     [not found]         ` <57FE679D.8010101-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2016-10-17 12:04           ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
     [not found]             ` <558d30e9-e374-728c-2099-ed8eccadf7a2-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2016-10-17 22:06               ` Dave Hansen
     [not found]                 ` <58054B48.1030600-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2016-10-18  6:01                   ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-09-13 19:45 ` [PATCH 2/5] mprotect.2: add pkey_mprotect() syscall Dave Hansen
2016-09-13 19:45 ` [PATCH 3/5] pkey_alloc.2: New page describing protection key allocation and free Dave Hansen
2016-09-13 19:46 ` [PATCH 4/5] sigaction.2: describe siginfo changes from pkey-induced signals Dave Hansen
2016-09-13 19:46 ` [PATCH 5/5] proc.5: describe new ProtectionKey smaps field Dave Hansen

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=CAKgNAkj8voeBsjERrRq+17L9rK5Vy_quv7Dm_7Hkmuvxfpw_iQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=mtk.manpages-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumwx3w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=dave.hansen-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.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.