From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RESEND v2] structleak: disable STRUCTLEAK_BYREF in combination with KASAN_STACK
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:23:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201907221022.4597DDD92@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190722114134.3123901-1-arnd@arndb.de>
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 01:41:20PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The combination of KASAN_STACK and GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF
> leads to much larger kernel stack usage, as seen from the warnings
> about functions that now exceed the 2048 byte limit:
>
> drivers/media/i2c/tvp5150.c:253:1: error: the frame size of 3936 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> drivers/media/tuners/r820t.c:1327:1: error: the frame size of 2816 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmsmac/phy/phy_n.c:16552:1: error: the frame size of 3144 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
> fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1892:1: error: the frame size of 2088 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c:737:1: error: the frame size of 2088 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> fs/ocfs2/namei.c:1677:1: error: the frame size of 2584 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> fs/ocfs2/super.c:1186:1: error: the frame size of 2640 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> fs/ocfs2/xattr.c:3678:1: error: the frame size of 2176 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c:7056:1: error: the frame size of 2144 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
> net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c: In function 'l2cap_recv_frame':
> net/bridge/br_netlink.c:1505:1: error: the frame size of 2448 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> net/ieee802154/nl802154.c:548:1: error: the frame size of 2232 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> net/wireless/nl80211.c:1726:1: error: the frame size of 2224 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> net/wireless/nl80211.c:2357:1: error: the frame size of 4584 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> net/wireless/nl80211.c:5108:1: error: the frame size of 2760 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
> net/wireless/nl80211.c:6472:1: error: the frame size of 2112 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
>
> The structleak plugin was previously disabled for CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST,
> but meant we missed some bugs, so this time we should address them.
>
> The frame size warnings are distracting, and risking a kernel stack
> overflow is generally not beneficial to performance, so it may be best
> to disallow that particular combination. This can be done by turning
> off either one. I picked the dependency in GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF
> and GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF_ALL, as this option is designed to
> make uninitialized stack usage less harmful when enabled on its own,
> but it also prevents KASAN from detecting those cases in which it was
> in fact needed.
>
> KASAN_STACK is currently implied by KASAN on gcc, but could be made a
> user selectable option if we want to allow combining (non-stack) KASAN
> with GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF.
>
> Note that it would be possible to specifically address the files that
> print the warning, but presumably the overall stack usage is still
> significantly higher than in other configurations, so this would not
> address the full problem.
>
> I could not test this with CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL, which may or may not
> suffer from a similar problem.
>
> Fixes: 81a56f6dcd20 ("gcc-plugins: structleak: Generalize to all variable types")
> Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190628123819.2785504-1-arnd@arndb.de/
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
> [v2] do it for both GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF and GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF_ALL.
>
> Andrew, can you pick this up in -mm? It looks like nobody else
> wanted it in their trees even though there was agreement on the
> patch itself.
Andrew, if you don't want it, I can take it via my gcc-plugins tree?
-Kees
> ---
> security/Kconfig.hardening | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/security/Kconfig.hardening b/security/Kconfig.hardening
> index a1ffe2eb4d5f..af4c979b38ee 100644
> --- a/security/Kconfig.hardening
> +++ b/security/Kconfig.hardening
> @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ choice
> config GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF
> bool "zero-init structs passed by reference (strong)"
> depends on GCC_PLUGINS
> + depends on !(KASAN && KASAN_STACK=1)
> select GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK
> help
> Zero-initialize any structures on the stack that may
> @@ -70,9 +71,15 @@ choice
> exposures, like CVE-2017-1000410:
> https://git.kernel.org/linus/06e7e776ca4d3654
>
> + As a side-effect, this keeps a lot of variables on the
> + stack that can otherwise be optimized out, so combining
> + this with CONFIG_KASAN_STACK can lead to a stack overflow
> + and is disallowed.
> +
> config GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF_ALL
> bool "zero-init anything passed by reference (very strong)"
> depends on GCC_PLUGINS
> + depends on !(KASAN && KASAN_STACK=1)
> select GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK
> help
> Zero-initialize any stack variables that may be passed
> --
> 2.20.0
>
--
Kees Cook
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-22 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-22 11:41 [PATCH] [RESEND v2] structleak: disable STRUCTLEAK_BYREF in combination with KASAN_STACK Arnd Bergmann
2019-07-22 13:42 ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-07-22 14:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-07-22 15:23 ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-07-22 17:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-07-22 17:23 ` Kees Cook [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=201907221022.4597DDD92@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.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 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).