From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH 2/3] Makefile: Move stackprotector availability out of Kconfig
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 17:13:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171004151312.GA20938@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK7LNARhoqX0Z--gFEP1xbvcEeg4aDD9rkV0SeUCa3icc1MN8g@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 11:33:38PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi Kees,
>
>
> 2017-10-03 4:20 GMT+09:00 Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>:
> > Various portions of the kernel, especially per-architecture pieces,
> > need to know if the compiler is building it with the stack protector.
> > This was done in the arch/Kconfig with 'select', but this doesn't
> > allow a way to do auto-detected compiler support. In preparation for
> > creating an on-if-available default, move the logic for the definition of
> > CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR into the Makefile.
> >
> > Cc: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
> > Cc: Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.com>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
> > Cc: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> > ---
> > Makefile | 7 +++++--
> > arch/Kconfig | 8 --------
> > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> > index d1119941261c..e122a9cf0399 100644
> > --- a/Makefile
> > +++ b/Makefile
> > @@ -688,8 +688,11 @@ else
> > stackp-flag := $(call cc-option, -fno-stack-protector)
> > endif
> > endif
> > -# Find arch-specific stack protector compiler sanity-checking script.
> > -ifdef CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR
> > +ifdef stackp-name
> > + # If the stack protector has been selected, inform the rest of the build.
> > + KBUILD_CFLAGS += -DCONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR
> > + KBUILD_AFLAGS += -DCONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR
> > + # Find arch-specific stack protector compiler sanity-checking script.
> > stackp-path := $(srctree)/scripts/gcc-$(SRCARCH)_$(BITS)-has-stack-protector.sh
> > stackp-check := $(wildcard $(stackp-path))
> > endif
>
>
> I have not tested this series,
> but I think this commit is bad (with the follow-up patch applied).
>
>
> I thought of this scenario:
>
> [1] Kernel is configured with CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR_AUTO
>
> [2] Kernel is built with a compiler without stack protector support.
>
> [3] CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR is not defined,
> so __stack_chk_fail() is not compiled.
>
> [4] Out-of-tree modules are compiled with a compiler with
> stack protector support.
> __stack_chk_fail() is inserted to functions of the modules.
We don't ever support the system of loading a module built with anything
other than the _exact_ same compiler than the kernel was. So this will
not happen (well, if someone tries it, they get to keep the pieces their
kernel image is now in...)
> [5] insmod fails because reference to __stack_chk_fail()
> can not be resolved.
Even nicer, we failed "cleanly" :)
This isn't a real-world issue, sorry.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-04 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-02 19:20 [PATCH 0/3] Makefile: Introduce CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR_AUTO Kees Cook
2017-10-02 19:20 ` [PATCH 1/3] sh/boot: Add static stack-protector to pre-kernel Kees Cook
2017-10-02 19:20 ` [PATCH 2/3] Makefile: Move stackprotector availability out of Kconfig Kees Cook
2017-10-04 14:33 ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-10-04 15:13 ` Greg KH [this message]
2017-10-04 16:22 ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2017-10-04 17:15 ` Greg KH
2017-10-02 19:20 ` [PATCH 3/3] Makefile: Introduce CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR_AUTO Kees Cook
2017-10-03 10:04 ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 0/3] " Mark Rutland
2017-10-03 15:51 ` 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=20171004151312.GA20938@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=labbott@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mmarek@suse.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/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).