From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@nebula.com>
Cc: "kexec@lists.infradead.org" <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec: Disable at runtime if the kernel enforces module signing
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 11:35:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130809153519.GI12688@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1376060830.2021.12.camel@x230>
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 03:07:13PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-08-09 at 07:02 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 03:36:37AM -0400, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > kexec permits the loading and execution of arbitrary code in ring 0, which
> > > is something that module signing enforcement is meant to prevent. It makes
> > > sense to disable kexec in this situation.
> > >
> >
> > But in the process we wipe out running kernel's context and boot into a new
> > kernel. So how different it is than root booting a new kernel through BIOS
> > which does not enforce module signing.
>
> What wipes the current kernel's context? KEXEC_JUMP is explicitly
> designed to allow you to hop back and forth, but even without it you
> should be able to reconstruct the original context. And there's no need
> to boot a new kernel, either. All the attacker needs is the physical
> address of the sig_enforce boolean, and then they launch a simple kexec
> payload that simply flips that back and returns to the original kernel -
> it's not like kexec limits you to booting Linux.
Also what about all the other patches you had for secureboot where you
closed down all the paths where root could write to kernel memory. So
if you want to protect sig_enforce boolean, then you need to close down
all these paths irrespective of secureboot?
Thanks
Vivek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-09 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-09 7:36 [PATCH] kexec: Disable at runtime if the kernel enforces module signing Matthew Garrett
2013-08-09 11:02 ` Vivek Goyal
2013-08-09 15:07 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-08-09 15:24 ` Vivek Goyal
2013-08-09 15:32 ` Vivek Goyal
2013-08-09 15:35 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2013-08-09 16:11 ` Matthew Garrett
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=20130809153519.GI12688@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew.garrett@nebula.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