From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux-I+IVW8TIWO2tmTQ+vhA3Yw@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] syscalls: Verify address
 limit before returning to user-mode
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 21:21:06 +0100
Message-ID: <20170512202106.GO22219@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
References: <20170509111007.GA14702@kroah.com>
 <CAJcbSZFswDWZoK-1UK+xkRMJ4ttSYbtH2Y5WD5_aPR-8ru6t8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJcbSZEoRyewUtBHvqmNZL9FtT_q42Vmmd-EuC50x-ZRASiHHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFwvQfs_X+paQF6Luc0Rq+W3J2fKuHRou7=ANcquDdXdDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170512072802.5a686f23@mschwideX1>
 <CAGXu5j+EatK=DYONRkgovwLgytAnbG8jnAZaMSLckZFNVj3gig@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170512075458.09a3a1ce@mschwideX1>
 <CAGXu5jL9vUrn4kpjO+qa4cHmWBypeqP17OGbrMs=5Nz0YpQMZw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFzbiBqsYb7vwO=+L4Vp_GOgPu+DBOrq4fBnyzq5DbBehg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGXu5j+xmyJ6RhtPw9rUgs7k3sZ1KKWffvyGGG--oPfu9W42ng@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5j+xmyJ6RhtPw9rUgs7k3sZ1KKWffvyGGG--oPfu9W42ng-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
To: Kees Cook <keescook-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening-ZwoEplunGu1jrUoiu81ncdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>, Greg KH <greg-U8xfFu+wG4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>, LKML <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>, David Howells <dhowells-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>, Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov-5HdwGun5lf+gSpxsJD1C4w@public.gmane.org>, linux-s390 <linux-s390-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ren=E9?= Nyffenegger <mail-gLCNRsNSrVdVZEhyV+6z5nIPMjoJpjVV@public.gmane.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>, "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>, Ri
List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:30:02PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> I'm clearly not explaining things well enough. I shouldn't say
> "corruption", I should say "malicious manipulation". The methodology
> of attacks against the stack are quite different from the other kinds
> of attacks like use-after-free, heap overflow, etc. Being able to
> exhaust the kernel stack (either due to deep recursion or unbounded
> alloca())

I really hope we don't have alloca() use in the kernel.  Do you have
evidence to support that assertion?

IMHO alloca() (or similar) should not be present in any kernel code
because we have a limited stack - we have kmalloc() etc for that kind
of thing.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.