From: "PaX Team" <pageexec@freemail.hu>
To: Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
Clemens Ladisch <clemens@ladisch.de>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86-ml <x86@kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Emese Revfy <re.emese@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] introduce post-init read-only memory
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 12:14:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56559815.30416.DC24D0B@pageexec.freemail.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56558826.1060202@ladisch.de>
On 25 Nov 2015 at 11:06, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> Mathias Krause wrote:
> > [...]
> > So, prior extending the usage of the __read_only annotation some
> > toolchain support is needed. Maybe a gcc plugin that'll warn/error on
> > code that writes to such a variable but is not __init itself.
>
> Or mark them as "const". This would require the initialization code to
> cast it away, probably with a helper macro.
no, that'd be undefined behaviour and in practice gcc would take advantage
of it and produce unintended (and quite broken) code. if the constified object
is modified from a different translation unit then the compiler is free
to assume that it can constant propagate its initialization value into uses,
completely breaking the code that (forcibly) writes to it.
however as a poor man's detector for such __read_only violations it's
possible to just make the object const temporarily (without casting away
the write attempts!), recompile the tree and see if any writes outside
__init functions pop up.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "PaX Team" <pageexec@freemail.hu>
To: Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
Clemens Ladisch <clemens@ladisch.de>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86-ml <x86@kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Emese Revfy <re.emese@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 0/2] introduce post-init read-only memory
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 12:14:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56559815.30416.DC24D0B@pageexec.freemail.hu> (raw)
Message-ID: <20151125111429.iXWjMeBWnopj6f-eCGAuWFwDgzChm77ta0KwzYJuZ2s@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56558826.1060202@ladisch.de>
On 25 Nov 2015 at 11:06, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> Mathias Krause wrote:
> > [...]
> > So, prior extending the usage of the __read_only annotation some
> > toolchain support is needed. Maybe a gcc plugin that'll warn/error on
> > code that writes to such a variable but is not __init itself.
>
> Or mark them as "const". This would require the initialization code to
> cast it away, probably with a helper macro.
no, that'd be undefined behaviour and in practice gcc would take advantage
of it and produce unintended (and quite broken) code. if the constified object
is modified from a different translation unit then the compiler is free
to assume that it can constant propagate its initialization value into uses,
completely breaking the code that (forcibly) writes to it.
however as a poor man's detector for such __read_only violations it's
possible to just make the object const temporarily (without casting away
the write attempts!), recompile the tree and see if any writes outside
__init functions pop up.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-25 11:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-24 21:38 [PATCH 0/2] introduce post-init read-only memory Kees Cook
2015-11-24 21:38 ` Kees Cook
2015-11-24 21:38 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: " Kees Cook
2015-11-24 21:38 ` Kees Cook
2015-11-25 0:34 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-25 0:34 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-25 0:44 ` Kees Cook
2015-11-25 0:54 ` [kernel-hardening] " Michael Ellerman
2015-11-25 15:03 ` Kees Cook
2015-11-25 23:05 ` Michael Ellerman
2015-11-25 23:32 ` Kees Cook
2015-11-25 23:32 ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2015-11-24 21:38 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86, vdso: mark vDSO read-only after init Kees Cook
2015-11-24 21:38 ` Kees Cook
2015-11-25 9:13 ` [PATCH 0/2] introduce post-init read-only memory Mathias Krause
2015-11-25 9:13 ` [kernel-hardening] " Mathias Krause
2015-11-25 10:06 ` Clemens Ladisch
2015-11-25 10:06 ` Clemens Ladisch
2015-11-25 11:14 ` PaX Team [this message]
2015-11-25 11:14 ` PaX Team
2015-11-25 11:05 ` PaX Team
2015-11-25 11:05 ` [kernel-hardening] " PaX Team
2015-11-26 8:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-26 9:57 ` PaX Team
2015-11-26 9:57 ` [kernel-hardening] " PaX Team
2015-11-26 10:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-26 12:14 ` PaX Team
2015-11-26 12:14 ` [kernel-hardening] " PaX Team
2015-11-27 8:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-27 8:05 ` [kernel-hardening] " Ingo Molnar
2015-11-27 15:29 ` PaX Team
2015-11-27 15:29 ` [kernel-hardening] " PaX Team
2015-11-27 16:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-29 8:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-29 8:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-29 11:15 ` PaX Team
2015-11-29 11:15 ` [kernel-hardening] " PaX Team
2015-11-29 15:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-29 18:05 ` Mathias Krause
2015-11-29 18:05 ` [kernel-hardening] " Mathias Krause
2015-11-30 8:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-30 8:01 ` [kernel-hardening] " Ingo Molnar
2015-11-26 16:11 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-26 16:11 ` [kernel-hardening] " Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-27 7:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-27 7:59 ` [kernel-hardening] " Ingo Molnar
2015-11-27 18:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-11-27 18:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-11-27 18:03 ` [kernel-hardening] " Linus Torvalds
2015-11-27 20:03 ` Kees Cook
2015-11-27 20:03 ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2015-11-27 20:09 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-29 8:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-29 8:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-11-30 21:14 ` H. Peter Anvin
2015-11-30 21:14 ` [kernel-hardening] " H. Peter Anvin
2015-11-30 21:33 ` Kees Cook
2015-11-30 21:38 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-30 21:38 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-11-30 21:43 ` H. Peter Anvin
2015-11-30 21:43 ` [kernel-hardening] " H. Peter Anvin
2015-11-25 17:26 ` Kees Cook
2015-11-25 17:26 ` [kernel-hardening] " Kees Cook
2015-11-25 17:31 ` H. Peter Anvin
2015-11-25 17:31 ` [kernel-hardening] " H. Peter Anvin
2015-11-25 18:54 ` Kees Cook
2015-11-25 19:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=56559815.30416.DC24D0B@pageexec.freemail.hu \
--to=pageexec@freemail.hu \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=clemens@ladisch.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=minipli@googlemail.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=re.emese@gmail.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).