From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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=-11.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham 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 A1923C433E0 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 02:05:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 425E464EBB for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 02:05:53 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 425E464EBB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 9B3F86B0005; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 21:05:52 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 98ABF6B0006; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 21:05:52 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 89F1E6B006C; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 21:05:52 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0057.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.57]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7512E6B0005 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 21:05:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin27.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3860A181AEF31 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 02:05:52 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77804346144.27.plot53_071681127614 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin27.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E4F63D663 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 02:05:52 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: plot53_071681127614 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5496 Received: from mail-pf1-f181.google.com (mail-pf1-f181.google.com [209.85.210.181]) by imf12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 02:05:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f181.google.com with SMTP id u143so2661359pfc.7 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:05:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=GWehHpPBiIbtAUGV973qzMbhfGOacu1gexxk5hpereM=; b=VkI1vNchcTfqZMT8TdeTKNunPyydlTDpaduc777AZXErfTUw+IoNoowB3buQXwB7D2 HM2cW4ajkZGMEI9fbbyaG+QS01IhsQO2IvFJRs0rrcX6Aw2nR/Sd0VcHmSULgTNW1OGQ OrJ32pm7uzcNVvPSKZDo8yzfQ3HtJKHFRkXZY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=GWehHpPBiIbtAUGV973qzMbhfGOacu1gexxk5hpereM=; b=pv/As0OQ2hD/zasN/lujCgHbtsp75UGbIfNfdyZXxBf75+TFz6aEmNG2FFLH9upHiq xmtbAXEBzczAiQECcb6R9MJEZN2nohoziA3XJBTRNjfbLEDnOJW14th3jJO0BqMDPPyx n4a6xQQPQa2yvcDI5b92eHI2RmyuyWGD7ad2bmKGJFRvioSWdN00qtO7FnF8XuoEJku9 /QGRSbXg4ZA3mi1K3VL6TeWdfXnSUOpQiHp+4sAmHq4GHJ/PuiJpntKih4bgX4RqqwUl bh8YYxmgpLamgmDZIsmz1GKcwkApRupi0CLnWYhrVbf2SW036V7ODggKoa4REK/OSKAh Speg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533cqVQJWtj7kk8bWYNNu4gkOeBIics/opB3zYIvpbtISRQzitUG gvbC6sNwHmJeOCm19dsv57v9oQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzsWXbn1Ou/vFtG4NQUWw149O4AAHSFlrE0lP7i2j/RD0O7x0LK3DLeL8X3j84QUwiX06AIsg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:6381:: with SMTP id x123mr1570843pgb.177.1613009150490; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:05:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h8sm3286360pfv.154.2021.02.10.18.05.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:05:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:05:48 -0800 From: Kees Cook To: "Yu, Yu-cheng" Cc: x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Andy Lutomirski , Balbir Singh , Borislav Petkov , Cyrill Gorcunov , Dave Hansen , Eugene Syromiatnikov , Florian Weimer , "H.J. Lu" , Jann Horn , Jonathan Corbet , Mike Kravetz , Nadav Amit , Oleg Nesterov , Pavel Machek , Peter Zijlstra , Randy Dunlap , "Ravi V. Shankar" , Vedvyas Shanbhogue , Dave Martin , Weijiang Yang , Pengfei Xu , haitao.huang@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 21/25] x86/cet/shstk: Handle signals for shadow stack Message-ID: <202102101805.0B98ACA743@keescook> References: <20210210175703.12492-1-yu-cheng.yu@intel.com> <20210210175703.12492-22-yu-cheng.yu@intel.com> <202102101154.CEF2606E@keescook> <57dcc827-052a-94cd-31d4-286675f9d506@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <57dcc827-052a-94cd-31d4-286675f9d506@intel.com> X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 01:38:10PM -0800, Yu, Yu-cheng wrote: > On 2/10/2021 11:58 AM, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 09:56:59AM -0800, Yu-cheng Yu wrote: > > > To deliver a signal, create a shadow stack restore token and put the token > > > and the signal restorer address on the shadow stack. For sigreturn, verify > > > the token and restore from it the shadow stack pointer. > > > > > > A shadow stack restore token marks a restore point of the shadow stack. > > > The token is distinctively different from any shadow stack address. > > > > How is it different? It seems like it just has the last 2 bits > > masked/set? > > > > For example, for 64-bit apps, > > A shadow stack pointer value (*ssp) has to be in some code area, but for a > token, (*ptr_of_token) = (ptr_of_token + 8), which has to be within the same > shadow stack area. In cet_verify_rstor_token(), this is checked. > > > > In sigreturn, restoring from a token ensures the target address is the > > > location pointed by the token. > > > > As in, a token (real stack address with 2-bit mask) is checked against > > the real stack address? I don't see a comparison -- it only checks that > > it is < TASK_SIZE. > > > > How does cet_restore_signal() figure into this? (As in, the MSR writes?) > > > > The kernel takes the restore address from the token. It will not mistakenly > take a wrong address from the shadow stack. I will put this in my commit > logs. Ah-ha, okay, got it now. Thank you! Reviewed-by: Kees Cook -- Kees Cook