From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: dan.j.williams@intel.com, dwmw@amazon.co.uk,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, keescook@chromium.org,
luto@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "x86/get_user: Use pointer masking to limit speculation" has been added to the 4.9-stable tree
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 03:38:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15180575000136@kroah.com> (raw)
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
x86/get_user: Use pointer masking to limit speculation
to the 4.9-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
x86-get_user-use-pointer-masking-to-limit-speculation.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.9 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
>From foo@baz Thu Feb 8 03:32:24 CET 2018
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:02:54 -0800
Subject: x86/get_user: Use pointer masking to limit speculation
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
(cherry picked from commit c7f631cb07e7da06ac1d231ca178452339e32a94)
Quoting Linus:
I do think that it would be a good idea to very expressly document
the fact that it's not that the user access itself is unsafe. I do
agree that things like "get_user()" want to be protected, but not
because of any direct bugs or problems with get_user() and friends,
but simply because get_user() is an excellent source of a pointer
that is obviously controlled from a potentially attacking user
space. So it's a prime candidate for then finding _subsequent_
accesses that can then be used to perturb the cache.
Unlike the __get_user() case get_user() includes the address limit check
near the pointer de-reference. With that locality the speculation can be
mitigated with pointer narrowing rather than a barrier, i.e.
array_index_nospec(). Where the narrowing is performed by:
cmp %limit, %ptr
sbb %mask, %mask
and %mask, %ptr
With respect to speculation the value of %ptr is either less than %limit
or NULL.
Co-developed-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Cc: alan@linux.intel.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/151727417469.33451.11804043010080838495.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com
Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
arch/x86/lib/getuser.S | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
--- a/arch/x86/lib/getuser.S
+++ b/arch/x86/lib/getuser.S
@@ -39,6 +39,8 @@ ENTRY(__get_user_1)
mov PER_CPU_VAR(current_task), %_ASM_DX
cmp TASK_addr_limit(%_ASM_DX),%_ASM_AX
jae bad_get_user
+ sbb %_ASM_DX, %_ASM_DX /* array_index_mask_nospec() */
+ and %_ASM_DX, %_ASM_AX
ASM_STAC
1: movzbl (%_ASM_AX),%edx
xor %eax,%eax
@@ -53,6 +55,8 @@ ENTRY(__get_user_2)
mov PER_CPU_VAR(current_task), %_ASM_DX
cmp TASK_addr_limit(%_ASM_DX),%_ASM_AX
jae bad_get_user
+ sbb %_ASM_DX, %_ASM_DX /* array_index_mask_nospec() */
+ and %_ASM_DX, %_ASM_AX
ASM_STAC
2: movzwl -1(%_ASM_AX),%edx
xor %eax,%eax
@@ -67,6 +71,8 @@ ENTRY(__get_user_4)
mov PER_CPU_VAR(current_task), %_ASM_DX
cmp TASK_addr_limit(%_ASM_DX),%_ASM_AX
jae bad_get_user
+ sbb %_ASM_DX, %_ASM_DX /* array_index_mask_nospec() */
+ and %_ASM_DX, %_ASM_AX
ASM_STAC
3: movl -3(%_ASM_AX),%edx
xor %eax,%eax
@@ -82,6 +88,8 @@ ENTRY(__get_user_8)
mov PER_CPU_VAR(current_task), %_ASM_DX
cmp TASK_addr_limit(%_ASM_DX),%_ASM_AX
jae bad_get_user
+ sbb %_ASM_DX, %_ASM_DX /* array_index_mask_nospec() */
+ and %_ASM_DX, %_ASM_AX
ASM_STAC
4: movq -7(%_ASM_AX),%rdx
xor %eax,%eax
@@ -93,6 +101,8 @@ ENTRY(__get_user_8)
mov PER_CPU_VAR(current_task), %_ASM_DX
cmp TASK_addr_limit(%_ASM_DX),%_ASM_AX
jae bad_get_user_8
+ sbb %_ASM_DX, %_ASM_DX /* array_index_mask_nospec() */
+ and %_ASM_DX, %_ASM_AX
ASM_STAC
4: movl -7(%_ASM_AX),%edx
5: movl -3(%_ASM_AX),%ecx
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from dan.j.williams@intel.com are
queue-4.9/kvm-vmx-allow-direct-access-to-msr_ia32_spec_ctrl.patch
queue-4.9/kvm-x86-add-ibpb-support.patch
queue-4.9/kvm-svm-allow-direct-access-to-msr_ia32_spec_ctrl.patch
queue-4.9/x86-paravirt-remove-noreplace-paravirt-cmdline-option.patch
queue-4.9/documentation-document-array_index_nospec.patch
queue-4.9/x86-usercopy-replace-open-coded-stac-clac-with-__uaccess_-begin-end.patch
queue-4.9/kvm-x86-make-indirect-calls-in-emulator-speculation-safe.patch
queue-4.9/vfs-fdtable-prevent-bounds-check-bypass-via-speculative-execution.patch
queue-4.9/x86-uaccess-use-__uaccess_begin_nospec-and-uaccess_try_nospec.patch
queue-4.9/x86-implement-array_index_mask_nospec.patch
queue-4.9/array_index_nospec-sanitize-speculative-array-de-references.patch
queue-4.9/kvm-vmx-make-indirect-call-speculation-safe.patch
queue-4.9/x86-kvm-update-spectre-v1-mitigation.patch
queue-4.9/x86-get_user-use-pointer-masking-to-limit-speculation.patch
queue-4.9/x86-syscall-sanitize-syscall-table-de-references-under-speculation.patch
queue-4.9/x86-spectre-report-get_user-mitigation-for-spectre_v1.patch
queue-4.9/x86-introduce-barrier_nospec.patch
queue-4.9/kvm-vmx-emulate-msr_ia32_arch_capabilities.patch
queue-4.9/x86-introduce-__uaccess_begin_nospec-and-uaccess_try_nospec.patch
queue-4.9/nl80211-sanitize-array-index-in-parse_txq_params.patch
reply other threads:[~2018-02-08 2:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=15180575000136@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dwmw@amazon.co.uk \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).