All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>
To: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@gmail.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/6] aarch64: avoid mprotect(PROT_BTI|PROT_EXEC) [BZ #26831]
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 13:19:16 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cover.1606319495.git.szabolcs.nagy@arm.com> (raw)

This is v2 of
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2020-November/119305.html

To enable BTI support, re-mmap executable segments instead of
mprotecting them in case mprotect is seccomp filtered.

I would like linux to change to map the main exe with PROT_BTI when
that is marked as BTI compatible. From the linux side i heard the
following concerns about this:
- it's an ABI change so requires some ABI bump. (this is fine with
  me, i think glibc does not care about backward compat as nothing
  can reasonably rely on the current behaviour, but if we have a
  new bit in auxv or similar then we can save one mprotect call.)
- in case we discover compatibility issues with user binaries it's
  better if userspace can easily disable BTI (e.g. removing the
  mprotect based on some env var, but if kernel adds PROT_BTI and
  mprotect is filtered then we have no reliable way to remove that
  from executables. this problem already exists for static linked
  exes, although admittedly those are less of a compat concern.)
- ideally PROT_BTI would be added via a new syscall that does not
  interfere with PROT_EXEC filtering. (this does not conflict with
  the current patches: even with a new syscall we need a fallback.)
- solve it in systemd (e.g. turn off the filter, use better filter):
  i would prefer not to have aarch64 (or BTI) specific policy in
  user code. and there was no satisfying way to do this portably.

Other concerns about the approach:
- mmap is more expensive than mprotect: in my measurements using
  mmap instead of mprotect is 3-8x slower (and after mmap pages
  have to be faulted in again), but e.g. the exec time of a program
  with 4 deps only increases by < 8% due to the 4 new mmaps. (the
  kernel side resource usage may increase too, i didnt look at that.)
- _dl_signal_error is not valid from the _dl_process_gnu_property
  hook. The v2 set addresses this problem: i could either propagate
  the errors up until they can be handled or solve it in the aarch64
  backend by first recording failures and then dealing with them in
  _dl_open_check. I choose the latter, but did some refactorings in
  _dl_map_object_from_fd that makes the former possible too.

v2:
- [1/6]: New patch that fixes a missed BTI bug found during v2.
- [2-3/6]: New, _dl_map_object_from_fd failure handling improvements,
  these are independent of the rest of the series.
- [4/6]: Move the note handling to a different place (after l_phdr
  setup, but before fd is closed).
- [5/6]: Rebased.
- [6/6]: First record errors and only report them later. (this fixes
  various failure handling issues.)

Szabolcs Nagy (6):
  aarch64: Fix missing BTI protection from dependencies [BZ #26926]
  elf: lose is closely tied to _dl_map_object_from_fd
  elf: Fix failure handling in _dl_map_object_from_fd
  elf: Move note processing after l_phdr is updated
  elf: Pass the fd to note processing
  aarch64: Use mmap to add PROT_BTI instead of mprotect [BZ #26831]

 elf/dl-load.c              | 110 ++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 elf/rtld.c                 |   4 +-
 sysdeps/aarch64/dl-bti.c   |  74 ++++++++++++++++++-------
 sysdeps/aarch64/dl-prop.h  |  14 +++--
 sysdeps/aarch64/linkmap.h  |   2 +-
 sysdeps/generic/dl-prop.h  |   6 +-
 sysdeps/generic/ldsodefs.h |   5 +-
 sysdeps/x86/dl-prop.h      |   6 +-
 8 files changed, 135 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-)

-- 
2.17.1


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>
To: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@gmail.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/6] aarch64: avoid mprotect(PROT_BTI|PROT_EXEC) [BZ #26831]
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 13:19:16 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cover.1606319495.git.szabolcs.nagy@arm.com> (raw)

This is v2 of
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2020-November/119305.html

To enable BTI support, re-mmap executable segments instead of
mprotecting them in case mprotect is seccomp filtered.

I would like linux to change to map the main exe with PROT_BTI when
that is marked as BTI compatible. From the linux side i heard the
following concerns about this:
- it's an ABI change so requires some ABI bump. (this is fine with
  me, i think glibc does not care about backward compat as nothing
  can reasonably rely on the current behaviour, but if we have a
  new bit in auxv or similar then we can save one mprotect call.)
- in case we discover compatibility issues with user binaries it's
  better if userspace can easily disable BTI (e.g. removing the
  mprotect based on some env var, but if kernel adds PROT_BTI and
  mprotect is filtered then we have no reliable way to remove that
  from executables. this problem already exists for static linked
  exes, although admittedly those are less of a compat concern.)
- ideally PROT_BTI would be added via a new syscall that does not
  interfere with PROT_EXEC filtering. (this does not conflict with
  the current patches: even with a new syscall we need a fallback.)
- solve it in systemd (e.g. turn off the filter, use better filter):
  i would prefer not to have aarch64 (or BTI) specific policy in
  user code. and there was no satisfying way to do this portably.

Other concerns about the approach:
- mmap is more expensive than mprotect: in my measurements using
  mmap instead of mprotect is 3-8x slower (and after mmap pages
  have to be faulted in again), but e.g. the exec time of a program
  with 4 deps only increases by < 8% due to the 4 new mmaps. (the
  kernel side resource usage may increase too, i didnt look at that.)
- _dl_signal_error is not valid from the _dl_process_gnu_property
  hook. The v2 set addresses this problem: i could either propagate
  the errors up until they can be handled or solve it in the aarch64
  backend by first recording failures and then dealing with them in
  _dl_open_check. I choose the latter, but did some refactorings in
  _dl_map_object_from_fd that makes the former possible too.

v2:
- [1/6]: New patch that fixes a missed BTI bug found during v2.
- [2-3/6]: New, _dl_map_object_from_fd failure handling improvements,
  these are independent of the rest of the series.
- [4/6]: Move the note handling to a different place (after l_phdr
  setup, but before fd is closed).
- [5/6]: Rebased.
- [6/6]: First record errors and only report them later. (this fixes
  various failure handling issues.)

Szabolcs Nagy (6):
  aarch64: Fix missing BTI protection from dependencies [BZ #26926]
  elf: lose is closely tied to _dl_map_object_from_fd
  elf: Fix failure handling in _dl_map_object_from_fd
  elf: Move note processing after l_phdr is updated
  elf: Pass the fd to note processing
  aarch64: Use mmap to add PROT_BTI instead of mprotect [BZ #26831]

 elf/dl-load.c              | 110 ++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 elf/rtld.c                 |   4 +-
 sysdeps/aarch64/dl-bti.c   |  74 ++++++++++++++++++-------
 sysdeps/aarch64/dl-prop.h  |  14 +++--
 sysdeps/aarch64/linkmap.h  |   2 +-
 sysdeps/generic/dl-prop.h  |   6 +-
 sysdeps/generic/ldsodefs.h |   5 +-
 sysdeps/x86/dl-prop.h      |   6 +-
 8 files changed, 135 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-)

-- 
2.17.1


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

             reply	other threads:[~2020-11-27 13:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-27 13:19 Szabolcs Nagy [this message]
2020-11-27 13:19 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] aarch64: avoid mprotect(PROT_BTI|PROT_EXEC) [BZ #26831] Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] aarch64: Fix missing BTI protection from dependencies [BZ #26926] Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:19   ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-10 17:51   ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-12-10 17:51     ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-12-11 15:33     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-11 15:33       ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:20 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] elf: lose is closely tied to _dl_map_object_from_fd Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:20   ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:20 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] elf: Fix failure handling in _dl_map_object_from_fd Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:20   ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-10 18:25   ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-12-10 18:25     ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-12-11  9:32     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-11  9:32       ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:20 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] elf: Move note processing after l_phdr is updated Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:20   ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:21 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] elf: Pass the fd to note processing Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:21   ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-10 18:35   ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-12-10 18:35     ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-11-27 13:21 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] aarch64: Use mmap to add PROT_BTI instead of mprotect [BZ #26831] Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-27 13:21   ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-02  8:55   ` [PATCH v3 1/2] aarch64: align address for BTI protection [BZ #26988] Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-02  8:55     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-10 18:49     ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-12-10 18:49       ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-12-02  8:55   ` [PATCH v3 2/2] aarch64: Use mmap to add PROT_BTI instead of mprotect [BZ #26831] Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-02  8:55     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-10 19:12     ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-12-10 19:12       ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-11-30 15:56 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] aarch64: avoid mprotect(PROT_BTI|PROT_EXEC) " Szabolcs Nagy
2020-11-30 15:56   ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-03 17:30 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-03 17:30   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-07 20:03   ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-07 20:03     ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-12-11 17:46     ` Catalin Marinas
2020-12-11 17:46       ` Catalin Marinas

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=cover.1606319495.git.szabolcs.nagy@arm.com \
    --to=szabolcs.nagy@arm.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=toiwoton@gmail.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.