From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
Cc: "dzickus@redhat.com" <dzickus@redhat.com>,
"jcastillo@redhat.com" <jcastillo@redhat.com>,
"riel@redhat.com" <riel@redhat.com>,
"prarit@redhat.com" <prarit@redhat.com>,
"mingo@kernel.com" <mingo@kernel.com>,
"pzijlstr@redhat.com" <pzijlstr@redhat.com>,
"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"bmr@redhat.com" <bmr@redhat.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"oleg@redhat.com" <oleg@redhat.com>,
"rostedt@goodmis.org" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"minchan@kernel.org" <minchan@kernel.org>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com"
<aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"hannes@cmpxchg.org" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"jgh@redhat.com" <jgh@redhat.com>,
"akpm@google.com" <akpm@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] sched: Always check the integrity of the canary
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 18:44:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140911174408.GA1873@atomlin.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D17490245@AcuExch.aculab.com>
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 04:02:45PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Aaron Tomlin
> > Currently in the event of a stack overrun a call to schedule()
> > does not check for this type of corruption. This corruption is
> > often silent and can go unnoticed. However once the corrupted
> > region is examined at a later stage, the outcome is undefined
> > and often results in a sporadic page fault which cannot be
> > handled.
> >
> > The first patch adds a canary to init_task's end of stack.
> > While the second patch provides a helper to determine the
> > integrity of the canary. The third checks for a stack
> > overrun and takes appropriate action since the damage
> > is already done, there is no point in continuing.
>
> Clearly you've just been 'bitten' by a kernel stack overflow.
> But a simple 'canary' isn't going to find most of the overflows
> and will give an incorrect 'sense of security'.
Please note that this is not suppose to be a 'perfect' solution.
Rather a worth while check in this particular code path.
Let's assume that the canary is damaged. In this situation it is
rather likely that the thread_info object has been compromised too.
--
Aaron Tomlin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
Cc: "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"dzickus@redhat.com" <dzickus@redhat.com>,
"jcastillo@redhat.com" <jcastillo@redhat.com>,
"riel@redhat.com" <riel@redhat.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"minchan@kernel.org" <minchan@kernel.org>,
"mingo@kernel.com" <mingo@kernel.com>,
"bmr@redhat.com" <bmr@redhat.com>,
"prarit@redhat.com" <prarit@redhat.com>,
"oleg@redhat.com" <oleg@redhat.com>,
"rostedt@goodmis.org" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"hannes@cmpxchg.org" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com"
<aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"akpm@google.com" <akpm@google.com>,
"jgh@redhat.com" <jgh@redhat.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"pzijlstr@redhat.com" <pzijlstr@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] sched: Always check the integrity of the canary
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 18:44:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140911174408.GA1873@atomlin.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D17490245@AcuExch.aculab.com>
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 04:02:45PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Aaron Tomlin
> > Currently in the event of a stack overrun a call to schedule()
> > does not check for this type of corruption. This corruption is
> > often silent and can go unnoticed. However once the corrupted
> > region is examined at a later stage, the outcome is undefined
> > and often results in a sporadic page fault which cannot be
> > handled.
> >
> > The first patch adds a canary to init_task's end of stack.
> > While the second patch provides a helper to determine the
> > integrity of the canary. The third checks for a stack
> > overrun and takes appropriate action since the damage
> > is already done, there is no point in continuing.
>
> Clearly you've just been 'bitten' by a kernel stack overflow.
> But a simple 'canary' isn't going to find most of the overflows
> and will give an incorrect 'sense of security'.
Please note that this is not suppose to be a 'perfect' solution.
Rather a worth while check in this particular code path.
Let's assume that the canary is damaged. In this situation it is
rather likely that the thread_info object has been compromised too.
--
Aaron Tomlin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-11 17:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-04 14:50 [PATCH 0/2] sched: Always check the integrity of the canary Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-04 14:50 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-04 14:50 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched: Add helper for task stack page overrun checking Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-04 14:50 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-04 15:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-09-04 15:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-09-04 15:52 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-04 15:52 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-04 15:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-04 15:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-04 14:50 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched: BUG when stack end location is over written Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-04 14:50 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-04 15:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-04 15:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-04 16:11 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-04 16:11 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-08 19:23 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] sched: Always check the integrity of the canary Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-08 19:23 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-08 19:23 ` [PATCH 1/3] init/main.c: Give init_task a canary Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-08 19:23 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-08 19:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] sched: Add helper for task stack page overrun checking Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-08 19:23 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-08 19:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] sched: BUG when stack end location is over written Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-08 19:23 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-09 9:42 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] sched: Always check the integrity of the canary Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-09 9:42 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-09 9:42 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] init/main.c: Give init_task a canary Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-09 9:42 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-10 7:26 ` Chuck Ebbert
2014-09-10 7:26 ` Chuck Ebbert
2014-09-10 13:29 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-10 13:29 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 12:23 ` Chuck Ebbert
2014-09-11 12:23 ` Chuck Ebbert
2014-09-11 14:47 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 14:47 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-09 9:42 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] sched: Add helper for task stack page overrun checking Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-09 9:42 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-09 9:42 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] sched: BUG when stack end location is over written Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-09 9:42 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 15:41 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] sched: Always check the integrity of the canary Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 15:41 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 15:41 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] init/main.c: Give init_task a canary Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 15:41 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-12 7:28 ` Michael Ellerman
2014-09-12 7:28 ` Michael Ellerman
2014-09-11 15:41 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] sched: Add helper for task stack page overrun checking Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 15:41 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 15:41 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] sched: BUG when stack end location is over written Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 15:41 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-12 4:06 ` Michael Ellerman
2014-09-12 4:06 ` Michael Ellerman
2014-09-12 9:44 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-12 9:44 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-12 10:58 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-09-12 10:58 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-09-15 2:39 ` Michael Ellerman
2014-09-15 2:39 ` Michael Ellerman
2014-09-12 6:04 ` Michael Ellerman
2014-09-12 6:04 ` Michael Ellerman
2014-09-12 9:50 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-12 9:50 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 15:53 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] sched: Always check the integrity of the canary Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-11 15:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-11 15:59 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 15:59 ` Aaron Tomlin
2014-09-11 16:02 ` David Laight
2014-09-11 16:02 ` David Laight
2014-09-11 17:26 ` Chuck Ebbert
2014-09-11 17:26 ` Chuck Ebbert
2014-09-12 8:43 ` David Laight
2014-09-12 8:43 ` David Laight
2014-09-11 17:44 ` Aaron Tomlin [this message]
2014-09-11 17:44 ` Aaron Tomlin
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=20140911174408.GA1873@atomlin.usersys.redhat.com \
--to=atomlin@redhat.com \
--cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
--cc=akpm@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bmr@redhat.com \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jcastillo@redhat.com \
--cc=jgh@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=pzijlstr@redhat.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@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.