Re: [RFC] Disable lockref on arm64

Kees Cook
2019-06-16T21:31:30Z

On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 04:18:21PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Yes, I am using the same saturation point as x86. In this example, I
> am not entirely sure I understand why it matters, though: the atomics
> guarantee that the write by CPU2 fails if CPU1 changed the value in
> the mean time, regardless of which value it wrote.
>
> I think the concern is more related to the likelihood of another CPU
> doing something nasty between the moment that the refcount overflows
> and the moment that the handler pins it at INT_MIN/2, e.g.,
>
> > CPU 1 CPU 2
> > inc()
> > load INT_MAX
> > about to overflow?
> > yes
> >
> > set to 0
> > <insert exploit here>
> > set to INT_MIN/2

Ah, gotcha, but the "set to 0" is really "set to INT_MAX+1" (not zero)
if you're using the same saturation.

--
Kees Cook