From: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Cc: keescook@chromium.org, christoffer.dall@arm.com,
will.deacon@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
mark.rutland@arm.com, labbott@fedoraproject.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PoC PATCH 0/3] arm64: basic ROP mitigation
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 18:27:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3d26b5e1-3e07-4166-1fe3-e1d6e44fcc98@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180802132133.23999-1-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
On 08/02/2018 06:21 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> This is a proof of concept I cooked up, primarily to trigger a discussion
> about whether there is a point to doing anything like this, and if there
> is, what the pitfalls are. Also, while I am not aware of any similar
> implementations, the idea is so simple that I would be surprised if nobody
> else thought of the same thing way before I did.
>
> The idea is that we can significantly limit the kernel's attack surface
> for ROP based attacks by clearing the stack pointer's sign bit before
> returning from a function, and setting it again right after proceeding
> from the [expected] return address. This should make it much more difficult
> to return to arbitrary gadgets, given that they rely on being chained to
> the next via a return address popped off the stack, and this is difficult
> when the stack pointer is invalid.
>
> Of course, 4 additional instructions per function return is not exactly
> for free, but they are just movs and adds, and leaf functions are
> disregarded unless they allocate a stack frame (this comes for free
> because simple_return insns are disregarded by the plugin)
>
> Please shoot, preferably with better ideas ...
>
> Ard Biesheuvel (3):
> arm64: use wrapper macro for bl/blx instructions from asm code
> gcc: plugins: add ROP shield plugin for arm64
> arm64: enable ROP protection by clearing SP bit #55 across function
> returns
>
> arch/Kconfig | 4 +
> arch/arm64/Kconfig | 10 ++
> arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h | 21 +++-
> arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S | 6 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S | 104 +++++++++-------
> arch/arm64/kernel/head.S | 4 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes_trampoline.S | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/sleep.S | 6 +-
> drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/Makefile | 3 +-
> scripts/Makefile.gcc-plugins | 7 ++
> scripts/gcc-plugins/arm64_rop_shield_plugin.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++++
> 11 files changed, 228 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 scripts/gcc-plugins/arm64_rop_shield_plugin.c
>
I tried this on the Fedora config and it died in mutex_lock
#0 el1_sync () at arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:570
#1 0xffff000008c62ed4 in __cmpxchg_case_acq_8 (new=<optimized out>, old=<optimized out>, ptr=<optimized out>) at ./arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic_lse.h:480
#2 __cmpxchg_acq (size=<optimized out>, new=<optimized out>, old=<optimized out>, ptr=<optimized out>) at ./arch/arm64/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:141
#3 __mutex_trylock_fast (lock=<optimized out>) at kernel/locking/mutex.c:144
#4 mutex_lock (lock=0xffff0000098dee48 <cgroup_mutex>) at kernel/locking/mutex.c:241
#5 0xffff000008f40978 in kallsyms_token_index ()
ffff000008bda050 <mutex_lock>:
ffff000008bda050: a9bf7bfd stp x29, x30, [sp, #-16]!
ffff000008bda054: aa0003e3 mov x3, x0
ffff000008bda058: d5384102 mrs x2, sp_el0
ffff000008bda05c: 910003fd mov x29, sp
ffff000008bda060: d2800001 mov x1, #0x0 // #0
ffff000008bda064: 97ff85af bl ffff000008bbb720 <__ll_sc___cmpxchg_case_acq_8>
ffff000008bda068: d503201f nop
ffff000008bda06c: d503201f nop
ffff000008bda070: b50000c0 cbnz x0, ffff000008bda088 <mutex_lock+0x38>
ffff000008bda074: a8c17bfd ldp x29, x30, [sp], #16
ffff000008bda078: 910003f0 mov x16, sp
ffff000008bda07c: 9248fa1f and sp, x16, #0xff7fffffffffffff
ffff000008bda080: d65f03c0 ret
ffff000008bda084: d503201f nop
ffff000008bda088: aa0303e0 mov x0, x3
ffff000008bda08c: 97ffffe7 bl ffff000008bda028 <__mutex_lock_slowpath>
ffff000008bda090: 910003fe mov x30, sp
ffff000008bda094: b24903df orr sp, x30, #0x80000000000000
ffff000008bda098: a8c17bfd ldp x29, x30, [sp], #16
ffff000008bda09c: 910003f0 mov x16, sp
ffff000008bda0a0: 9248fa1f and sp, x16, #0xff7fffffffffffff
ffff000008bda0a4: d65f03c0 ret
ffff000008bbb720 <__ll_sc___cmpxchg_case_acq_8>:
ffff000008bbb720: f9800011 prfm pstl1strm, [x0]
ffff000008bbb724: c85ffc10 ldaxr x16, [x0]
ffff000008bbb728: ca010211 eor x17, x16, x1
ffff000008bbb72c: b5000071 cbnz x17, ffff000008bbb738 <__ll_sc___cmpxchg_case_acq_8+0x18>
ffff000008bbb730: c8117c02 stxr w17, x2, [x0]
ffff000008bbb734: 35ffff91 cbnz w17, ffff000008bbb724 <__ll_sc___cmpxchg_case_acq_8+0x4>
ffff000008bbb738: aa1003e0 mov x0, x16
ffff000008bbb73c: 910003f0 mov x16, sp
ffff000008bbb740: 9248fa1f and sp, x16, #0xff7fffffffffffff
ffff000008bbb744: d65f03c0 ret
If I turn off CONFIG_ARM64_LSE_ATOMICS it works
Thanks,
Laura
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: labbott@redhat.com (Laura Abbott)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC/PoC PATCH 0/3] arm64: basic ROP mitigation
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 18:27:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3d26b5e1-3e07-4166-1fe3-e1d6e44fcc98@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180802132133.23999-1-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
On 08/02/2018 06:21 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> This is a proof of concept I cooked up, primarily to trigger a discussion
> about whether there is a point to doing anything like this, and if there
> is, what the pitfalls are. Also, while I am not aware of any similar
> implementations, the idea is so simple that I would be surprised if nobody
> else thought of the same thing way before I did.
>
> The idea is that we can significantly limit the kernel's attack surface
> for ROP based attacks by clearing the stack pointer's sign bit before
> returning from a function, and setting it again right after proceeding
> from the [expected] return address. This should make it much more difficult
> to return to arbitrary gadgets, given that they rely on being chained to
> the next via a return address popped off the stack, and this is difficult
> when the stack pointer is invalid.
>
> Of course, 4 additional instructions per function return is not exactly
> for free, but they are just movs and adds, and leaf functions are
> disregarded unless they allocate a stack frame (this comes for free
> because simple_return insns are disregarded by the plugin)
>
> Please shoot, preferably with better ideas ...
>
> Ard Biesheuvel (3):
> arm64: use wrapper macro for bl/blx instructions from asm code
> gcc: plugins: add ROP shield plugin for arm64
> arm64: enable ROP protection by clearing SP bit #55 across function
> returns
>
> arch/Kconfig | 4 +
> arch/arm64/Kconfig | 10 ++
> arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h | 21 +++-
> arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S | 6 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S | 104 +++++++++-------
> arch/arm64/kernel/head.S | 4 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/probes/kprobes_trampoline.S | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/sleep.S | 6 +-
> drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/Makefile | 3 +-
> scripts/Makefile.gcc-plugins | 7 ++
> scripts/gcc-plugins/arm64_rop_shield_plugin.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++++
> 11 files changed, 228 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 scripts/gcc-plugins/arm64_rop_shield_plugin.c
>
I tried this on the Fedora config and it died in mutex_lock
#0 el1_sync () at arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:570
#1 0xffff000008c62ed4 in __cmpxchg_case_acq_8 (new=<optimized out>, old=<optimized out>, ptr=<optimized out>) at ./arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic_lse.h:480
#2 __cmpxchg_acq (size=<optimized out>, new=<optimized out>, old=<optimized out>, ptr=<optimized out>) at ./arch/arm64/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:141
#3 __mutex_trylock_fast (lock=<optimized out>) at kernel/locking/mutex.c:144
#4 mutex_lock (lock=0xffff0000098dee48 <cgroup_mutex>) at kernel/locking/mutex.c:241
#5 0xffff000008f40978 in kallsyms_token_index ()
ffff000008bda050 <mutex_lock>:
ffff000008bda050: a9bf7bfd stp x29, x30, [sp, #-16]!
ffff000008bda054: aa0003e3 mov x3, x0
ffff000008bda058: d5384102 mrs x2, sp_el0
ffff000008bda05c: 910003fd mov x29, sp
ffff000008bda060: d2800001 mov x1, #0x0 // #0
ffff000008bda064: 97ff85af bl ffff000008bbb720 <__ll_sc___cmpxchg_case_acq_8>
ffff000008bda068: d503201f nop
ffff000008bda06c: d503201f nop
ffff000008bda070: b50000c0 cbnz x0, ffff000008bda088 <mutex_lock+0x38>
ffff000008bda074: a8c17bfd ldp x29, x30, [sp], #16
ffff000008bda078: 910003f0 mov x16, sp
ffff000008bda07c: 9248fa1f and sp, x16, #0xff7fffffffffffff
ffff000008bda080: d65f03c0 ret
ffff000008bda084: d503201f nop
ffff000008bda088: aa0303e0 mov x0, x3
ffff000008bda08c: 97ffffe7 bl ffff000008bda028 <__mutex_lock_slowpath>
ffff000008bda090: 910003fe mov x30, sp
ffff000008bda094: b24903df orr sp, x30, #0x80000000000000
ffff000008bda098: a8c17bfd ldp x29, x30, [sp], #16
ffff000008bda09c: 910003f0 mov x16, sp
ffff000008bda0a0: 9248fa1f and sp, x16, #0xff7fffffffffffff
ffff000008bda0a4: d65f03c0 ret
ffff000008bbb720 <__ll_sc___cmpxchg_case_acq_8>:
ffff000008bbb720: f9800011 prfm pstl1strm, [x0]
ffff000008bbb724: c85ffc10 ldaxr x16, [x0]
ffff000008bbb728: ca010211 eor x17, x16, x1
ffff000008bbb72c: b5000071 cbnz x17, ffff000008bbb738 <__ll_sc___cmpxchg_case_acq_8+0x18>
ffff000008bbb730: c8117c02 stxr w17, x2, [x0]
ffff000008bbb734: 35ffff91 cbnz w17, ffff000008bbb724 <__ll_sc___cmpxchg_case_acq_8+0x4>
ffff000008bbb738: aa1003e0 mov x0, x16
ffff000008bbb73c: 910003f0 mov x16, sp
ffff000008bbb740: 9248fa1f and sp, x16, #0xff7fffffffffffff
ffff000008bbb744: d65f03c0 ret
If I turn off CONFIG_ARM64_LSE_ATOMICS it works
Thanks,
Laura
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-18 1:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-02 13:21 [RFC/PoC PATCH 0/3] arm64: basic ROP mitigation Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-02 13:21 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-02 13:21 ` [RFC/PoC PATCH 1/3] arm64: use wrapper macro for bl/blx instructions from asm code Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-02 13:21 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-02 13:21 ` [RFC/PoC PATCH 2/3] gcc: plugins: add ROP shield plugin for arm64 Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-02 13:21 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-02 13:21 ` [RFC/PoC PATCH 3/3] arm64: enable ROP protection by clearing SP bit #55 across function returns Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-02 13:21 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 10:07 ` [RFC/PoC PATCH 0/3] arm64: basic ROP mitigation Florian Weimer
2018-08-06 10:07 ` Florian Weimer
2018-08-06 10:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 10:31 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 13:55 ` Robin Murphy
2018-08-06 13:55 ` Robin Murphy
2018-08-06 14:04 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 14:04 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 15:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 15:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 15:38 ` Robin Murphy
2018-08-06 15:38 ` Robin Murphy
2018-08-06 15:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 15:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 16:04 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 16:04 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 17:45 ` Robin Murphy
2018-08-06 17:45 ` Robin Murphy
2018-08-06 18:49 ` Kees Cook
2018-08-06 18:49 ` Kees Cook
2018-08-06 19:35 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 19:35 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 19:50 ` Kees Cook
2018-08-06 19:50 ` Kees Cook
2018-08-06 19:54 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-06 19:54 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-07 3:05 ` Mark Brand
2018-08-07 9:21 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-07 9:21 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-08 16:09 ` Mark Brand
2018-08-08 16:09 ` Mark Brand
2018-08-08 22:02 ` Kees Cook
2018-08-08 22:02 ` Kees Cook
2018-08-13 7:39 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-18 1:27 ` Laura Abbott [this message]
2018-08-18 1:27 ` Laura Abbott
2018-08-20 6:30 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-08-20 6:30 ` Ard Biesheuvel
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=3d26b5e1-3e07-4166-1fe3-e1d6e44fcc98@redhat.com \
--to=labbott@redhat.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=christoffer.dall@arm.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=labbott@fedoraproject.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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.