From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Jason Yan <yanaijie@huawei.com>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CONFIG_HARDENED_USERCOPY
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 12:47:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201908301242.EAC8111@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190830042958.GC7777@dread.disaster.area>
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 02:29:58PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 09:15:36AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:42:30PM +0800, Jason Yan wrote:
> > > We found an issue of kernel bug related to HARDENED_USERCOPY.
> > > When copying an IO buffer to userspace, HARDENED_USERCOPY thought it is
> > > illegal to copy this buffer. Actually this is because this IO buffer was
> > > merged from two bio vectors, and the two bio vectors buffer was allocated
> > > with kmalloc() in the filesystem layer.
> >
> > Ew. I thought the FS layer was always using page_alloc?
>
> No, they don't. It's perfectly legal to use heap memory for bio
> buffers - we've been doing it since, at least, XFS got merged all
> those years ago.
Okay, so I have some observations/thoughts about this:
- This "cross allocation merging" is going to continue being a problem
in the future when we have hardware-backed allocation tagging (like
ARM's MTE). It'll be exactly the same kind of detection: a tagged
pointer crossed into a separately allocated region and access through
it will be rejected.
- I don't think using _copy_to_user() unconditionally is correct here
unless we can be absolutely sure that the size calculation really
was correct. (i.e. is the merge close enough to the copy that the
non-merge paths don't lose the validation?)
- If this has gone until now to get noticed (hardened usercopy was
introduced in v4.8), is this optimization (and, frankly, layering
violation) actually useful?
- We could just turn off allocation merging in the face of having
hardened usercopy or allocation tagging enabled...
--
Kees Cook
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-30 19:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-29 12:42 CONFIG_HARDENED_USERCOPY Jason Yan
2019-08-29 16:15 ` CONFIG_HARDENED_USERCOPY Kees Cook
2019-08-30 4:29 ` CONFIG_HARDENED_USERCOPY Dave Chinner
2019-08-30 19:47 ` Kees Cook [this message]
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=201908301242.EAC8111@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yanaijie@huawei.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 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).