From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ed1-f43.google.com (mail-ed1-f43.google.com [209.85.208.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D504E1C07D6; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:00:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.208.43 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736769618; cv=none; b=aeQPOykjU9p/Rsq/6UXTyAyAfJbi+OhIgdyvHb74DSjmqnEEfVQoUq6UmcB5AOeAJIuRCQobAFUGTJ4uTediWH/yubgaJRP3dgB6xE8IY13lW6YVtjL7d2K3nbe1Ipg2pCl4Gx7VDIiiD+A/k6VReEMV5Ps2OfzO56r+ng/Eyzo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736769618; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9CquxanJN5IYrnqzauIW98vxTqhC2+liy/rKYYXlctE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:From:To:Cc:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Nc+5g1o9TQfoSKT752aUi40pJmwLWBBTlayOjWzxYOICyplf4fA4jU9Ov/llfhLR7e1n38LHy4m87YbkCFT4xtWXej+j51Zd+q5cmP1rsoIQHuJO9nTyIYBw2x9sfcrwK2cZHPSkGa5JOnM6pB35yI4hYqHxe2JR+dalLqhPHKU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=JBJDcCtE; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.208.43 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="JBJDcCtE" Received: by mail-ed1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5d3f57582a2so10351789a12.1; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 04:00:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736769614; x=1737374414; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:content-language:references :cc:to:from:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=kBy06+ZzcG8cE/DV4b6e6/PZwuQ0e32d8+VJrouA7ds=; b=JBJDcCtE+GoV0MN9Q3M8klUzfFR4cjz4m8jpyKTuNCi/iYL7NDfOx21yrzulvNU30a SellI13kBABMWBaTZyDjfOtn8HLQx5o+bnr+qxhjMRCGcYXIfP2OOce98q6VT2Zupwwi W1VzJzMi6W2SlLlvlzfDEn0s8ExpvSWEUzEUjZJ580bglb4ouYiUz100L9M8AmHHzkCw 7WtqcKSAndXTCSwfoAtKBvaQXPMtu/a30It21ouEZPXXxPSknMgKRQvMOvRL5GrdbWzK uCL/29PA/c5Ubbt5ddZX8im7YDtCvulsHMsOwV10xlpCRp4M4o4g4ANjROgdn/NeSaUz vOig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736769614; x=1737374414; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:content-language:references :cc:to:from:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=kBy06+ZzcG8cE/DV4b6e6/PZwuQ0e32d8+VJrouA7ds=; b=gfqbWr8Vgg4dmYABqJTA4WOe3LKyMRldkc4DUDiRlxfB1KlIj5yMdWfDSzhT11Siw2 6uJTNDsj1wpms31KB3ftRPqnKBvpYJ+m0Zx0+ugfylMaCr/prJdSSoORYakpcGqgBpp7 Nsg2/Y+XHayj99Wvrlm8jW2TeAuC+izKZK0sbad0iH0i2lndcnlcqX9luVk9W1ljDdrk cxao3JQO/UMVVtUyoehHFTjgUNV/Jd1n/z2nVWeo9oQpoLQgTrDqeaUmf5FRgTh52CLf SQXltQWpwCdXsOw83rHjXllys6rk3k/1fhGYM9uBtAOVLPSXEzdM+RRAIKMRO2Xe0aN1 aabQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVmJuI2RmT3GLHU5cfMSVK/nWWVmj4OGyJQXGhyUvXA4yzUJZ+58za98t/0xB475niScszg9PP3li7B83s=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwxRUM1fUyi2iCmj12Z05CfDLUcrSYP/aNZD+sKHsSUBQ2XfmGc l1k2ngwgutcwJQrE4lVvuJXeVQ0NiMnzNayMQ7bAGAq/piRRGTvj X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctgVak7xknqrw1dEWEbQCK6T+JXcJvNFf8IC2OCStgmE3khMfWt259OTPFLQHY 06uOGR5NL++3tHUHSq5OU7eM/LBsGwaHPjywr+u5QwTEcN/lpeBmRL6d/npZL+QfgCCv6WboHjc caRIhHoRFandB1NzxgJkQQ6lWOG4qJ6W7LmjEFIV67VIcaztPh9ryXQFUjTFlloMCNTh+55PCmG WxX8fF9e5NmWiJzVFF5ifPh7Q2QYH8RcmPM0Yk9T4/OHNtzj6Bhkbb6oYTMgicM+p+3FLLxiydC fsO56n3PWsiGdX983VTRNlWe4CXt2sW8ig== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE2OiQLKWaCSsDOk6IrssLsCvOozbvLXI9Jg/KEGSqDrR4j0Kdgbeeer+mXtV1iLbFtO49dBQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:3f1d:b0:aa6:88a2:cfbd with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-ab2c3d09e99mr1401413766b.22.1736769613078; Mon, 13 Jan 2025 04:00:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2a03:83e0:1126:4:829:739b:3caa:6500? ([2620:10d:c092:500::6:97ef]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-ab2c90d52edsm490919366b.42.2025.01.13.04.00.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 13 Jan 2025 04:00:12 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <138f28ec-341e-4c48-a14b-4371a8198de8@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:00:12 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] efi/memattr: Use desc_size instead of total size to check for corruption From: Usama Arif To: Dave Young , Ard Biesheuvel Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, devel@edk2.groups.io, kexec@lists.infradead.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, leitao@debian.org, gourry@gourry.net, kernel-team@meta.com References: <20250108215957.3437660-1-usamaarif642@gmail.com> <20250108215957.3437660-2-usamaarif642@gmail.com> <8613563a-ee7c-4271-b1f0-4d1ac365ad3a@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 13/01/2025 11:27, Usama Arif wrote: > > > On 13/01/2025 02:33, Dave Young wrote: >> On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 18:54, Usama Arif wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 10/01/2025 07:21, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>>> On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 at 17:36, Usama Arif wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 09/01/2025 15:45, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 23:00, Usama Arif wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The commit in [1] introduced a check to see if EFI memory attributes >>>>>>> table was corrupted. It assumed that efi.memmap.nr_map remains >>>>>>> constant, but it changes during late boot. >>>>>>> Hence, the check is valid during cold boot, but not in the subsequent >>>>>>> kexec boot. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is best explained with an exampled. At cold boot, for a test >>>>>>> machine: >>>>>>> efi.memmap.nr_map=91, >>>>>>> memory_attributes_table->num_entries=48, >>>>>>> desc_size = 48 >>>>>>> Hence, the check introduced in [1] where 3x the size of the >>>>>>> entire EFI memory map is a reasonable upper bound for the size of this >>>>>>> table is valid. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In late boot __efi_enter_virtual_mode calls 2 functions that updates >>>>>>> efi.memmap.nr_map: >>>>>>> - efi_map_regions which reduces the `count` of map entries >>>>>>> (for e.g. if should_map_region returns false) and which is reflected >>>>>>> in efi.memmap by __efi_memmap_init. >>>>>>> At this point efi.memmap.nr_map becomes 46 in the test machine. >>>>>>> - efi_free_boot_services which also reduces the number of memory regions >>>>>>> available (for e.g. if md->type or md->attribute is not the right value). >>>>>>> At this point efi.memmap.nr_map becomes 9 in the test machine. >>>>>>> Hence when you kexec into a new kernel and pass efi.memmap, the >>>>>>> paramaters that are compared are: >>>>>>> efi.memmap.nr_map=9, >>>>>>> memory_attributes_table->num_entries=48, >>>>>>> desc_size = 48 >>>>>>> where the check in [1] is no longer valid with such a low efi.memmap.nr_map >>>>>>> as it was reduced due to efi_map_regions and efi_free_boot_services. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A more appropriate check is to see if the description size reported by >>>>>>> efi and memory attributes table is the same. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241031175822.2952471-2-ardb+git@google.com/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Fixes: 8fbe4c49c0cc ("efi/memattr: Ignore table if the size is clearly bogus") >>>>>>> Reported-by: Breno Leitao >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Usama Arif >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> drivers/firmware/efi/memattr.c | 16 ++++++---------- >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The more I think about this, the more I feel that kexec on x86 should >>>>>> simply discard this table, and run with the firmware code RWX (which >>>>>> is not the end of the world). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> By discard this table, do you mean kexec not use e820_table_firmware? >>>> >>>> No, I mean kexec ignores the memory attributes table. >>>> >>>>> Also a very basic question, what do you mean by run with the firmware RWX? >>>>> >>>> >>>> The memory attributes table is an overlay for the EFI memory map that >>>> describes which runtime code regions may be mapped with restricted >>>> permissions. Without this table, everything will be mapped writable as >>>> well as executable, but only in the EFI page tables, which are only >>>> active when an EFI call is in progress. >>>> >>> >>> Thanks for explaining! >>> >>> So basically get rid of memattr.c :) >>> >>> Do you mean get rid of it only for kexec, or not do it for any >>> boot (including cold boot)? >>> I do like this idea! I couldn't find this in the git history, >>> but do you know if this was added in the linux kernel just >>> because EFI spec added support for it, or if there was a >>> specific security problem? >>> >> >> Usama, can you try the patch below? >> [ format is wrong due to webmail corruption. But if it works I can >> send a formal patch later ] >> >> $ git diff arch/x86 >> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c b/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c >> index 846bf49f2508..58dc77c5210e 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c >> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/quirks.c >> @@ -561,6 +561,11 @@ int __init efi_reuse_config(u64 tables, int nr_tables) >> >> if (!efi_guidcmp(guid, SMBIOS_TABLE_GUID)) >> ((efi_config_table_64_t *)p)->table = data->smbios; >> + >> + /* Not bother to play with mem attr table across kexec */ >> + if (!efi_guidcmp(guid, EFI_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES_TABLE_GUID)) >> + ((efi_config_table_64_t *)p)->table = >> EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR; >> + >> p += sz; >> } >> > > This would work, I am guessing it will have a similar effect to what I sent > last week in > https://lore.kernel.org/all/fd63613c-fd26-42de-b5ed-cc734f72eb36@gmail.com/ > > I think it needs to be wrapped in ifdef CONFIG_X86_64. > IMO we should consider the 2 patches in this series first before disabling it for kexec. These patches actually fix the issue.