Re: [PATCH 16/18] net: mpls: prevent bounds-check bypass via speculative execution

Dan Williams
2018-01-10T00:48:24Z

On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 7:42 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > originally from Linus and tweaked by Alexei and I:
>
> Sadly, that tweak - while clever - is wrong.
>
> > unsigned long _mask = ~(long)(_m - 1 - _i) >> BITS_PER_LONG - 1;\
>
> Why?
>
> Because "(long)(_m-1-_i)" is not negative just because "i >= m". It
> can still be positive.
>
> Think "m = 100", "i=bignum". The subtraction will overflow and become
> positive again, the shift will shift to zero, and then the mask will
> become ~0.
>
> Now, you can fix it, but you need to be a tiny bit more clever. In
> particular, just make sure that you retain the high bit of "_i",
> basically making the rule be that a negative index is not ever valid.
>
> And then instead of "(_m - 1 - _i)", you use "(_i | (_m - 1 - _i))".
> Now the sign bit is set if _i had it set, _or_ if the subtraction
> turned negative, and you don't have to worry about the overflow
> situation.
>
> But it does require that extra step to be trustworthy. Still purely
> cheap arithmetic operations, although there is possibly some
> additional register pressure there.
>
> Somebody might be able to come up with something even more minimal (or
> find a fault in my fix of your tweak).

I looks like there is another problem, or I'm misreading the
cleverness. We want the mask to be ~0 in the ok case and 0 in the
out-of-bounds case. As far as I can see we end up with ~0 in the ok
case, and ~1 in the bad case. Don't we need to do something like the
following, at which point are we getting out of the realm of "cheap
ALU instructions"?

#define __nospec_array_ptr(base, idx, sz) \
({ \
union { typeof(&base[0]) _ptr; unsigned long _bit; } __u; \
unsigned long _i = (idx); \
unsigned long _s = (sz); \
unsigned long _v = (long)(_i | _s - 1 - _i) \
>> BITS_PER_LONG - 1; \
unsigned long _mask = _v * ~0UL; \
OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR(_mask); \
__u._ptr = &base[_i & _mask]; \
__u._bit &= _mask; \
__u._ptr; \
})

elem = nospec_array_ptr(array, idx, 3);
106: b8 02 00 00 00 mov $0x2,%eax
10b: 48 63 ff movslq %edi,%rdi
10e: 48 29 f8 sub %rdi,%rax
111: 48 09 f8 or %rdi,%rax
114: 48 c1 e8 3f shr $0x3f,%rax
118: 48 21 c7 and %rax,%rdi
11b: 48 8d 54 bc 04 lea 0x4(%rsp,%rdi,4),%rdx
120: 48 21 d0 and %rdx,%rax