From: "Valdis Klētnieks" <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu>
To: Muni Sekhar <munisekharrms@gmail.com>
Cc: kernelnewbies <kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Query Regarding Stack-Out-of-Bounds Error
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 15:46:39 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <212937.1724701599@turing-police> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHhAz+hjhZQnTWX088EmMDbszAJrrBQBqkhvfiMjxQPNtWbkqw@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 18:04:39 +0530, Muni Sekhar said:
> static struct cmd_info *find_cmd_entry_any_ring(struct intel_gvt *gvt,
> unsigned int opcode, int rings)
> {
> struct cmd_info *info = NULL;
> unsigned int ring;
> ...
> for_each_set_bit(ring, (unsigned long *)&rings, I915_NUM_ENGINES) {
>
> In the above code, a 32-bit integer pointer (rings) is being cast to a
> 64-bit unsigned long pointer, which leads to an extra 4 bytes being
> accessed. This raises a concern regarding a stack-out-of-bounds bug.
>
> My specific query is: While it is logically understandable that a
> write operation involving these extra 4 bytes could cause a kernel
> crash, in this case, it is a read operation that is occurring.
Note that 'ring' is located in the stack frame for the current function. So to
complete the analysis - is there any way that the stack frame can be located in
such a way that 'ring' is the *very last* 4 bytes on a page, and the next page
*isn't* allocated, *and* I915_NUM_ENGINES is big enough to cause the loop to walk
off the end?
For bonus points, part 1: Does the answer depend on whether the architecture
has stacks that grow up, or grow down in address?
For bonus points, part 2: can this function be called quickly enough, and
enough times, that it can be abused to do something interesting to L1/L2 cache
and speculative execution, because some systems will fetch not only the bytes
needed, but as much as 64 or 128 bytes of cache line? Can you name 3 security
bugs that abused this sort of thing?
Free hint: There's a bit of interesting code in kernel/exit.c that tells you if
your system has gotten close to running out of kernel stack.
[/usr/src/linux-next] dmesg | grep 'greatest stack'
[ 1.093400] [ T40] pgdatinit0 (40) used greatest stack depth: 13920 bytes left
[ 3.832907] [ T82] modprobe (82) used greatest stack depth: 8 bytes left
Hmm... wonder how that modprobe managed *that* :)
\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-26 19:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-26 12:34 Query Regarding Stack-Out-of-Bounds Error Muni Sekhar
2024-08-26 19:46 ` Valdis Klētnieks [this message]
2024-08-27 10:31 ` Muni Sekhar
2024-08-31 17:19 ` Muni Sekhar
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=212937.1724701599@turing-police \
--to=valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=munisekharrms@gmail.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