All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>
To: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@it.uu.se>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Is kernel optimized with dead store removal?
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:14:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B8693B9.3060102@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19334.22971.970220.245930@pilspetsen.it.uu.se>


>  >  Does this optimization also occur during compilation of the Linux
>  >  kernel?

> Any such dead store removal is up to the compiler and the lifetime
> of the object being clobbered. For 'auto' objects the optimization
> is certainly likely.
> 
> This is only a problem if the memory (a thread stack, say) is recycled
> and leaked uninitialized to user-space, but such bugs are squashed
> fairly quickly upon discovery.

Thanks for comments,

In the sha1_update() case I don't know whether the stack is recycled and
leaked - it may be dependent on the calling function, but isn't it
vulnerable?

I tested this with the snippet below. If compiled with -O1 or -O2 and
ON_STACK defined 1, I can read "Secret" a second time. With ON_STACK
defined 0 I do not.

Roel

---
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

#define ON_STACK 1

void foo()
{
        char password[] = "secret";
        password[0]='S';
        printf ("Don't show again: %s\n", password);
        memset(password, 0, sizeof(password));
}

void foo2()
{
        char* password = malloc(7);
        strncpy (password, "secret" , 7);
        password[6] = '\0';
        password[0] = 'S';
        printf ("Don't show again: %s\n", password);
        memset(password, 0, 7);
        free(password);

}

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{

#if ON_STACK == 1
        foo();
#else
        foo2();
#endif
        int i;
        char foo3[] = "hoi";
        printf ("foo1:%s\n", foo3);
        char* bar = &foo3[0];
        for (i = -50; i < 50; i++)
                printf ("%c.", bar[i]);
        printf("\n");
        return 0;
}

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-25 15:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-24 22:13 Is kernel optimized with dead store removal? Roel Kluin
2010-02-25 11:06 ` Mikael Pettersson
2010-02-25 15:14   ` Roel Kluin [this message]
2010-02-25 16:06     ` Mikael Pettersson
2010-02-25 18:24       ` Stefan Richter
2010-02-25 23:58       ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh

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=4B8693B9.3060102@gmail.com \
    --to=roel.kluin@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mikpe@it.uu.se \
    /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.