From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86: Return to kernel without IRET
Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 12:00:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53653CC8.1050900@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzSmm=UiK0WA7yPRojNBuOHhVYSYOFqeyXQUDd0ungNUQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 05/03/2014 06:54 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:12 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>> On 05/02/2014 09:32 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>>
>>> At least as a proof-of-concept, having a code sequence in user mode
>>> trampoline that does
>>>
>>> popq %rsi
>>> popq %r11
>>> retq $128
>>>
>>> and building up a stack in user space at '%rsp-128' that has the
>>> values or rsi/r11/rip should allow us to use 'sysret'. Hmm?
>>
>> That would be a security hole if another userspace thread could muck
>> with the stack.
>
> No, all of the above is in user space, and the pre-restore register
> values for rsi/r11/rip/rsp are all user space values (just not the
> right ones for the "real" return point). So no security issue.
>
> Now, replacing "iret" with "sysret + user-space trampoline" doesn't
> work in general (it gets RF wrong, for example, so it's useless for
> single-stepping and breakpoint handling), but I was more thinking that
> it would be an interesting way to see what the performance impact of a
> faster iret would be.
>
Right, brain failure on my part. I somehow got it in my head you'd run
the above off the user stack while in CPL 0, which would be obviously crazy.
I think this would be rather interesting experiment.
-hpa
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-03 19:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-02 23:53 [PATCH v2] x86: Return to kernel without IRET Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-03 4:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-03 11:24 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-05-03 22:19 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-03 23:51 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-04 0:31 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-04 2:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-04 2:14 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-05 15:47 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-03 4:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-03 6:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-03 13:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-03 19:00 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
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=53653CC8.1050900@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--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.