Kernel-hardening Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@linux.intel.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
	hpa@zytor.com,  arjan@linux.intel.com,
	rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 06/11] x86: make sure _etext includes function sections
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2020 11:41:15 -0800
Message-ID: <75f0bd0365857ba4442ee69016b63764a8d2ad68.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202002060408.84005CEFFD@keescook>

On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 04:26 -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 02:39:45PM -0800, Kristen Carlson Accardi
> wrote:
> > We will be using -ffunction-sections to place each function in
> > it's own text section so it can be randomized at load time. The
> > linker considers these .text.* sections "orphaned sections", and
> > will place them after the first similar section (.text). However,
> > we need to move _etext so that it is after both .text and .text.*
> > We also need to calculate text size to include .text AND .text.*
> 
> The dependency on the linker's orphan section handling is, I feel,
> rather fragile (during work on CFI and generally building kernels
> with
> Clang's LLD linker, we keep tripping over difference between how BFD
> and
> LLD handle orphans). However, this is currently no way to perform a
> section "pass through" where input sections retain their name as an
> output section. (If anyone knows a way to do this, I'm all ears).
> 
> Right now, you can only collect sections like this:
> 
>         .text :  AT(ADDR(.text) - LOAD_OFFSET) {
> 		*(.text.*)
> 	}
> 
> or let them be orphans, which then the linker attempts to find a
> "similar" (code, data, etc) section to put them near:
> https://sourceware.org/binutils/docs-2.33.1/ld/Orphan-Sections.html
> 
> So, basically, yes, this works, but I'd like to see BFD and LLD grow
> some kind of /PASSTHRU/ special section (like /DISCARD/), that would
> let
> a linker script specify _where_ these sections should roughly live.
> 
> Related thoughts:
> 
> I know x86_64 stack alignment is 16 bytes. I cannot find evidence for
> what function start alignment should be. It seems the linker is 16
> byte
> aligning these functions, when I think no alignment is needed for
> function starts, so we're wasting some memory (average 8 bytes per
> function, at say 50,000 functions, so approaching 512KB) between
> functions. If we can specify a 1 byte alignment for these orphan
> sections, that would be nice, as mentioned in the cover letter: we
> lose
> a 4 bits of entropy to this alignment, since all randomized function
> addresses will have their low bits set to zero.

So, when I was developing this patch set, I initially ignored the value
of sh_addralign and just packed the functions in one right after
another when I did the new layout. They were byte aligned :). I later
realized that I should probably pay attention to alignment and thus
started respecting the value that was in sh_addralign. There is
actually nothing stopping me from ignoring it again, other than I am
concerned that I will make runtime performance suffer even more than I
already have.

> 
> And we can't adjust function section alignment, or there is some
> benefit to a larger alignment, I would like to have a way for the
> linker
> to specify the inter-section padding (or fill) bytes. Right now, the
> FILL(0xnn) (or =0xnn) can be used to specify the padding bytes
> _within_
> a section, but not between sections. Right now, BFD appears to 0-pad. 
> I'd
> like that to be 0xCC so "guessing" addresses incorrectly will trigger
> a trap.

Padding the space between functions with int3 is easy to add during
boot time, and I've got it on my todo list.



  parent reply index

Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-05 22:39 [RFC PATCH 00/11] Finer grained kernel address space randomization Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] modpost: Support >64K sections Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 12:38   ` Kees Cook
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] x86: tools/relocs: Support >64K section headers Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 12:39   ` Kees Cook
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 03/11] x86/boot: Allow a "silent" kaslr random byte fetch Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06  1:08   ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-06 11:48     ` Kees Cook
2020-02-06 16:58     ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] x86/boot/KASLR: Introduce PRNG for faster shuffling Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06  1:11   ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-06 15:10   ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2020-02-07  7:23     ` Jean-Philippe Aumasson
2020-02-07  9:05       ` Kees Cook
2020-02-07 16:52         ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] x86: Makefile: Add build and config option for CONFIG_FG_KASLR Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 10:30   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-06 11:52     ` Kees Cook
2020-02-25 17:55   ` Arvind Sankar
2020-02-26 19:13     ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-03-24 21:24     ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-03-25 15:34       ` Kees Cook
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] x86: make sure _etext includes function sections Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 12:26   ` Kees Cook
2020-02-06 13:15     ` Jann Horn
2020-02-06 16:27       ` David Laight
2020-02-06 14:39     ` Arvind Sankar
2020-02-06 15:29       ` Arvind Sankar
2020-02-06 16:11         ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-06 14:57     ` Arvind Sankar
2020-02-06 15:45       ` Arvind Sankar
2020-02-06 19:41     ` Kristen Carlson Accardi [this message]
2020-02-06 20:02       ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-07  9:24         ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-10  1:43           ` Kees Cook
2020-02-10 10:51             ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-10 15:54               ` Arjan van de Ven
2020-02-10 16:36                 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-02-21 19:50                   ` Josh Poimboeuf
2020-02-21 23:05                     ` Arvind Sankar
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] x86/tools: Adding relative relocs for randomized functions Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 12:37   ` Kees Cook
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] x86: Add support for finer grained KASLR Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06  1:17   ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-06 11:56     ` Kees Cook
2020-02-06 17:36       ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 10:38   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-06 12:06     ` Kees Cook
2020-02-06 14:52       ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-06 17:25         ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 17:35           ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-02-06 17:43             ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-25 17:49   ` Arvind Sankar
2020-02-26 19:26     ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 09/11] kallsyms: hide layout and expose seed Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 12:32   ` Kees Cook
2020-02-06 17:51     ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 19:27       ` Jann Horn
2020-03-02 19:01         ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-03-02 19:08           ` Kees Cook
2020-03-02 19:19             ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-27  2:42       ` Baoquan He
2020-02-27 16:02         ` Kees Cook
2020-02-28  3:36           ` Baoquan He
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] module: Reorder functions Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 12:41   ` Kees Cook
2020-02-11 12:39     ` Jessica Yu
2020-02-05 22:39 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] x86/boot: Move "boot heap" out of .bss Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06  0:11   ` Arvind Sankar
2020-02-06  0:33     ` Kristen Carlson Accardi
2020-02-06 11:13     ` Kees Cook
2020-02-06 14:25       ` Arvind Sankar
2020-02-06 21:32         ` 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=75f0bd0365857ba4442ee69016b63764a8d2ad68.camel@linux.intel.com \
    --to=kristen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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

Kernel-hardening Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/kernel-hardening/0 kernel-hardening/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 kernel-hardening kernel-hardening/ https://lore.kernel.org/kernel-hardening \
		kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
	public-inbox-index kernel-hardening

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/com.openwall.lists.kernel-hardening


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git