From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=zby7=DN=lists.openwall.com=kernel-hardening-return-20111-kernel-hardening=archiver.kernel.org@kernel.org>
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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,
	USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 671CDC41604
	for <kernel-hardening@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue,  6 Oct 2020 08:36:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mother.openwall.net (mother.openwall.net [195.42.179.200])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4998F2080A
	for <kernel-hardening@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue,  6 Oct 2020 08:36:08 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4998F2080A
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.com
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kernel-hardening-return-20111-kernel-hardening=archiver.kernel.org@lists.openwall.com
Received: (qmail 17755 invoked by uid 550); 6 Oct 2020 08:36:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact kernel-hardening-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:kernel-hardening-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:kernel-hardening-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:kernel-hardening-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-ID: <kernel-hardening.lists.openwall.com>
Received: (qmail 17735 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2020 08:36:02 -0000
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 08:35:50 +0000 (UTC)
From: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>
X-X-Sender: cl@www.lameter.com
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, 
    Alexander Popov <alex.popov@linux.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, 
    Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>, 
    Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>, 
    Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, 
    David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>, 
    Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, 
    Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>, 
    Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>, 
    Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, 
    Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, 
    Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>, 
    Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>, 
    David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, 
    Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>, 
    Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>, 
    Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, 
    Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, 
    Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com>, 
    Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de>, 
    Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>, 
    kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, 
    Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>, 
    kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, notify@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/6] Break heap spraying needed for exploiting
 use-after-free
In-Reply-To: <202010051905.62D79560@keescook>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2010060833000.99155@www.lameter.com>
References: <20200929183513.380760-1-alex.popov@linux.com> <91d564a6-9000-b4c5-15fd-8774b06f5ab0@linux.com> <CAG48ez1tNU_7n8qtnxTYZ5qt-upJ81Fcb0P2rZe38ARK=iyBkA@mail.gmail.com> <20201006004414.GP20115@casper.infradead.org> <202010051905.62D79560@keescook>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (DEB 394 2020-01-19)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII


On Mon, 5 Oct 2020, Kees Cook wrote:

> > TYPESAFE_BY_RCU, but if forcing that on by default would enhance security
> > by a measurable amount, it wouldn't be a terribly hard sell ...
>
> Isn't the "easy" version of this already controlled by slab_merge? (i.e.
> do not share same-sized/flagged kmem_caches between different caches)

Right.

> The large trouble are the kmalloc caches, which don't have types
> associated with them. Having implicit kmem caches based on the type
> being allocated there would need some pretty extensive plumbing, I
> think?

Actually typifying those accesses may get rid of a lot of kmalloc
allocations and could help to ease the management and control of objects.

It may be a big task though given the ubiquity of kmalloc and the need to
create a massive amount of new slab caches. This is going to reduce the
cache hit rate significantly.