All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
To: "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Possible security hole in command	parsing
Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 12:31:14 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <871tirza8t.fsf@gaia.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <554212BF.1040309@zoho.com>

"Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> writes:

Hi,

> i915_parse_cmds returns -EACCES on chained batches, which "tells the
> caller to abort and dispatch the workload as a non-secure batch",
> but the mechanism implementing that was broken when
> flags |= I915_DISPATCH_SECURE was moved from i915_gem_execbuffer_parse
> to i915_gem_do_execbuffer (17cabf571e50677d980e9ab2a43c5f11213003ae):
> i915_gem_execbuffer_parse returns the original batch_obj in this case,
> and i915_gem_do_execbuffer doesn't check for that.

> Is this being made secure some other way (in which case the obsolete
> comments should probably be removed), or is this a security hole?
>
> Warning: this is my first kernel patch, and has not been tested yet.
> Signed-off-by: Rebecca Palmer <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> 
>
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> @@ -1398,7 +1398,7 @@ i915_gem_do_execbuffer(struct drm_device
>  {
>  	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
>  	struct eb_vmas *eb;
> -	struct drm_i915_gem_object *batch_obj;
> +	struct drm_i915_gem_object *batch_obj, *orig_batch_obj;
>  	struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 shadow_exec_entry;
>  	struct intel_engine_cs *ring;
>  	struct intel_context *ctx;
> @@ -1511,7 +1511,7 @@ i915_gem_do_execbuffer(struct drm_device
>  		goto err;
>  
>  	/* take note of the batch buffer before we might reorder the lists */
> -	batch_obj = eb_get_batch(eb);
> +	orig_batch_obj = eb_get_batch(eb);
>  
>  	/* Move the objects en-masse into the GTT, evicting if necessary. */
>  	need_relocs = (args->flags & I915_EXEC_NO_RELOC) == 0;
> @@ -1533,7 +1533,7 @@ i915_gem_do_execbuffer(struct drm_device
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Set the pending read domains for the batch buffer to COMMAND */
> -	if (batch_obj->base.pending_write_domain) {
> +	if (orig_batch_obj->base.pending_write_domain) {
>  		DRM_DEBUG("Attempting to use self-modifying batch buffer\n");
>  		ret = -EINVAL;
>  		goto err;
> @@ -1543,7 +1543,7 @@ i915_gem_do_execbuffer(struct drm_device
>  		batch_obj = i915_gem_execbuffer_parse(ring,
>  						      &shadow_exec_entry,
>  						      eb,
> -						      batch_obj,
> +						      orig_batch_obj,
>  						      args->batch_start_offset,
>  						      args->batch_len,
>  						      file->is_master);
> @@ -1559,7 +1559,7 @@ i915_gem_do_execbuffer(struct drm_device
>  		 * don't want that set when the command parser is
>  		 * enabled.
>  		 */
> -		if (USES_PPGTT(dev))

USES_PPGTT(dev) has been removed in the latest nightly, so you can
remove it here.


> +		if (USES_PPGTT(dev) && batch_obj!=orig_batch_obj)

Coding convention needs spaces around the != check.
(see scripts/checkpatch.pl).

Also please consider adding comment above parsed_obj != batch_obj
check about the parser ignoring the batch. Like
/* Skip the promotion if the parser ignored the patch */

>  			dispatch_flags |= I915_DISPATCH_SECURE;

On other gens where cmdparser is disabled, batch_obj is
left dangling as the 'if (i915_needs_cmd_parser(ring) && args->batch_len)'
branch is never taken on other than gen == 7.

I suggest that you introduce a *parsed_obj in the branch scope,
give original batch_obj to execbuffer_parse() and and do the
parsed_obj != batch_obj and batch_obj reassignment inside the
scope.

-Mika

>  		exec_start = 0;
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-05-08  9:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-30 11:32 [PATCH] drm/i915: Possible security hole in command parsing Rebecca N. Palmer
2015-05-01 19:13 ` Rebecca N. Palmer
2015-05-05 21:39   ` Rebecca N. Palmer
2015-06-05  0:29     ` Kees Cook
2015-06-05  8:04       ` Rebecca N. Palmer
2015-05-08  9:31 ` Mika Kuoppala [this message]
2015-05-08 11:24 ` [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter
2015-05-08 13:26   ` [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Fix possible " Rebecca N. Palmer
2015-05-08 14:04     ` Mika Kuoppala
2015-05-08 14:25       ` Daniel Vetter
2015-05-08 16:51         ` [PATCH for 4.1] drm/i915: Don't clear exec_start if batch was not copied Rebecca N. Palmer

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=871tirza8t.fsf@gaia.fi.intel.com \
    --to=mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=rebecca_palmer@zoho.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.