From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@google.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/mm/KASLR: EFI region is mistakenly included into KASLR VA space for randomization
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 09:52:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu-7z-JMK=sS2TLirAcyvvyU5w3ry4A8v-jreLsq_haN6A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170324094656.r2nln4vbidj5jhqt@pd.tnic>
On 24 March 2017 at 09:46, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:42:40AM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> That is a different matter. If the regions are only mapped while
>> runtime services invocations are in progress (as we do on ARM), I am
>> not sure if it matters that much, given how rarely that occurs in
>> normal use.
>
> Question is, is there anything worth protecting with ASLR or we don't
> care? I wanna say, we should randomize just in case, especially as it
> shouldn't be that expensive to do.
>
Well, given that in many cases, these pages are mapped R+W+X, I would
say that there is a risk involved in having these data structures at
fixed offsets.
Since UEFI v2.6, we have a new firmware table that describes strict
permission attributes for these regions, so everything can be mapped
writable or executable but never both. (Sai wired up the support for
this for x86 in v4.10)
> Also, how does the whole EFI-in-the-kexec-ed-kernel work on ARM? Runtime
> services get mapped on-demand in the kexec-ed kernel too?
>
Yes. On ARM, we use an ordinary mm_struct and just do a switch_mm()
with preemption disabled. So there is no need to reserve kernel VA
ranges, all UEFI runtime mappings are in the user area.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp-Gina5bIWoIWzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Dave Young <dyoung-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Baoquan He <bhe-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"stable-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<stable-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
"x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org"
<x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Thomas Garnier <thgarnie-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>,
Andrew Morton
<akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>,
Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro-uWyLwvC0a2jby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org>,
Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/mm/KASLR: EFI region is mistakenly included into KASLR VA space for randomization
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 09:52:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu-7z-JMK=sS2TLirAcyvvyU5w3ry4A8v-jreLsq_haN6A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170324094656.r2nln4vbidj5jhqt-fF5Pk5pvG8Y@public.gmane.org>
On 24 March 2017 at 09:46, Borislav Petkov <bp-Gina5bIWoIWzQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:42:40AM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> That is a different matter. If the regions are only mapped while
>> runtime services invocations are in progress (as we do on ARM), I am
>> not sure if it matters that much, given how rarely that occurs in
>> normal use.
>
> Question is, is there anything worth protecting with ASLR or we don't
> care? I wanna say, we should randomize just in case, especially as it
> shouldn't be that expensive to do.
>
Well, given that in many cases, these pages are mapped R+W+X, I would
say that there is a risk involved in having these data structures at
fixed offsets.
Since UEFI v2.6, we have a new firmware table that describes strict
permission attributes for these regions, so everything can be mapped
writable or executable but never both. (Sai wired up the support for
this for x86 in v4.10)
> Also, how does the whole EFI-in-the-kexec-ed-kernel work on ARM? Runtime
> services get mapped on-demand in the kexec-ed kernel too?
>
Yes. On ARM, we use an ordinary mm_struct and just do a switch_mm()
with preemption disabled. So there is no need to reserve kernel VA
ranges, all UEFI runtime mappings are in the user area.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-24 9:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-24 4:59 [PATCH v2] x86/mm/KASLR: EFI region is mistakenly included into KASLR VA space for randomization Baoquan He
2017-03-24 4:59 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-24 8:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-03-24 8:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-03-24 8:34 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-24 8:34 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-24 8:46 ` Dave Young
2017-03-24 8:46 ` Dave Young
2017-03-24 9:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-03-24 9:36 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-03-24 9:37 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-03-24 9:37 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-03-24 9:40 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-03-24 9:42 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-03-24 9:46 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-03-24 9:46 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-03-24 9:52 ` Ard Biesheuvel [this message]
2017-03-24 9:52 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-03-24 10:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-03-24 10:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-03-24 10:42 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-03-24 10:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-03-24 11:52 ` Baoquan He
2017-03-24 8:53 ` Dave Young
2017-03-24 8:10 ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86/mm/KASLR: Exclude EFI region from KASLR VA space randomization tip-bot for Baoquan He
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='CAKv+Gu-7z-JMK=sS2TLirAcyvvyU5w3ry4A8v-jreLsq_haN6A@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=bhsharma@redhat.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thgarnie@google.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--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.