From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Eric Northup <digitaleric@google.com>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com"
<kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@intel.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>,
Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@vsecurity.com>,
Julien Tinnes <jln@google.com>, Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] x86: kaslr: relocate base offset at boot
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 14:25:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <516C702C.2030209@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAG7+5M12cAavi9XBYoe39X=JtpWUu4wxjaAfOZP+=1qaKz7C+A@mail.gmail.com>
On 04/15/2013 02:06 PM, Eric Northup wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 8:06 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>> On 04/13/2013 05:37 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>
>>> so decompress code position is changed?
>>>
>>> You may push out bss and other data area of run-time kernel of limit
>>> that boot loader
>>> chose according to setup_header.init_size.
>>> aka that make those area overlap with ram hole or other area like
>>> boot command line or initrd....
>>>
>>
>> Is there a strong reason to randomize the physical address on 64 bits
>> (and if so, shouldn't we do it right?)
>
> The reason to randomize the physical address is because of the kernel
> direct mapping range -- a predictable-to-attackers physical address
> implies a predictable-to-attackers virtual address.
>
> It had seemed to me like changing the virtual base of the direct
> mapping would be much more involved than physically relocating the
> kernel, but better suggestions would be most welcome :-)
>
You seem to be missing something here...
There are *two* mappings in 64-bit mode. Physically, if you're going to
randomize you might as well randomize over the entire range... except
not too far down (on either 32 or 64 bit mode)... in particular, you
don't want to drop below 16 MiB if you can avoid it.
On 64 bits, there is no reason the virtual address has to be randomized
the same way.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-15 21:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-12 20:13 [PATCH v2 0/6] kernel ASLR Kees Cook
2013-04-12 20:13 ` [PATCH 1/6] x86: relocs: generalize Elf structure names Kees Cook
2013-04-16 23:17 ` [tip:x86/kaslr] x86, relocs: Generalize ELF " tip-bot for Kees Cook
2013-04-12 20:13 ` [PATCH 2/6] x86: relocs: consolidate processing logic Kees Cook
2013-04-16 23:18 ` [tip:x86/kaslr] x86, relocs: Consolidate " tip-bot for Kees Cook
2013-04-12 20:13 ` [PATCH 3/6] x86: relocs: add 64-bit ELF support to relocs tool Kees Cook
2013-04-16 23:19 ` [tip:x86/kaslr] x86, relocs: Add " tip-bot for Kees Cook
2013-04-12 20:13 ` [PATCH 4/6] x86: relocs: build separate 32/64-bit tools Kees Cook
2013-04-16 22:21 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-16 22:38 ` Kees Cook
2013-04-16 22:39 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-16 23:20 ` [tip:x86/kaslr] x86, relocs: Build " tip-bot for Kees Cook
2013-04-16 23:22 ` [tip:x86/kaslr] x86, relocs: Refactor the relocs tool to merge 32- and 64-bit ELF tip-bot for H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-12 20:13 ` [PATCH 5/6] x86: kaslr: routines to choose random base offset Kees Cook
2013-04-14 0:11 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-04-12 20:13 ` [PATCH 6/6] x86: kaslr: relocate base offset at boot Kees Cook
2013-04-14 0:37 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-04-14 3:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-15 21:06 ` Eric Northup
2013-04-15 21:25 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2013-04-15 21:41 ` Kees Cook
2013-04-15 21:44 ` Eric Northup
2013-04-15 21:46 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-15 21:59 ` Kees Cook
2013-04-16 2:31 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-16 2:40 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-16 16:08 ` Kees Cook
2013-04-15 22:00 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-04-15 22:07 ` Kees Cook
2013-04-15 22:38 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-04-15 22:42 ` Kees Cook
2013-04-15 22:57 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-04-16 2:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-16 2:36 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-16 2:56 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-04-16 3:02 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-16 13:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-16 13:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-16 18:08 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] kernel ASLR Kees Cook
2013-04-16 18:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=516C702C.2030209@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=digitaleric@google.com \
--cc=drosenberg@vsecurity.com \
--cc=jarkko.sakkinen@intel.com \
--cc=jln@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt.fleming@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mjg@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=wad@chromium.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/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