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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable 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 1838EC43218 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 06:08:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E434721473 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 06:08:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726056AbfD1GIk (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Apr 2019 02:08:40 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:57918 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726023AbfD1GIk (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Apr 2019 02:08:40 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x3S643Iv075925 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 02:08:38 -0400 Received: from e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2s54gjtyr9-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 02:08:38 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 07:08:36 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.198) by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.133) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Sun, 28 Apr 2019 07:08:31 +0100 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x3S68UHQ51380324 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 28 Apr 2019 06:08:30 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A195AE053; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 06:08:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3BBDAE045; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 06:08:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rapoport-lnx (unknown [9.148.8.112]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 06:08:28 +0000 (GMT) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 09:08:27 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Dave Hansen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexandre Chartre , Andy Lutomirski , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , James Bottomley , Jonathan Adams , Kees Cook , Paul Turner , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] x86: introduce system calls addess space isolation References: <1556228754-12996-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com> <1c12e195-1286-0136-eae5-4b392d9fe4c0@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1c12e195-1286-0136-eae5-4b392d9fe4c0@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19042806-0012-0000-0000-000003160643 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19042806-0013-0000-0000-0000214E67F8 Message-Id: <20190428060826.GF14896@rapoport-lnx> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-04-28_04:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=634 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1904280043 Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 07:41:09AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 4/25/19 2:45 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > The idea behind the prevention is that if we fault in pages in the > > execution path, we can compare target address against the kernel symbol > > table. So if we're in a function, we allow local jumps (and simply falling > > of the end of a page) but if we're jumping to a new function it must be to > > an external label in the symbol table. Since ROP attacks are all about > > jumping to gadget code which is effectively in the middle of real > > functions, the jumps they induce are to code that doesn't have an external > > symbol, so it should mostly detect when they happen. > > This turns the problem from: "attackers can leverage any data/code that > the kernel has mapped (anything)" to "attackers can leverage any > code/data that the current syscall has faulted in". > > That seems like a pretty restrictive change. > > > At this time we are not suggesting any API that will enable the system > > calls isolation. Because of the overhead required for this, it should only > > be activated for processes or containers we know should be untrusted. We > > still have no actual numbers, but surely forcing page faults during system > > call execution will not come for free. > > What's the minimum number of faults that have to occur to handle the > simplest dummy fault? For the current implementation it's 3. Here is the example trace of #PF's produced by a dummy get_answer system call from patch 7: [ 12.012906] #PF: DATA: do_syscall_64+0x26b/0x4c0 fault at 0xffffffff82000bb8 [ 12.012918] #PF: INSN: __x86_indirect_thunk_rax+0x0/0x20 fault at __x86_indirect_thunk_rax+0x0/0x20 [ 12.012929] #PF: INSN: __x64_sys_get_answer+0x0/0x10 fault at__x64_sys_get_answer+0x0/0x10 For the sci_write_dmesg syscall that does copy_from_user() and printk() its between 35 and 60 depending on console and /proc/sys/kernel/printk values. This includes both code and data accesses. The data page faults can be avoided if we pre-populate SCI page tables with data. -- Sincerely yours, Mike.