Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] x86-64: Improve vsyscall emulation CS and RIPhandling

[Borislav Petkov]

On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 11:22:08PM -0400, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Two fixes here:
>  - Send SIGSEGV if called from compat code or with a funny CS.
>  - Don't BUG on impossible addresses.
> 
> This patch also removes an unused variable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/vsyscall.h |   12 --------
>  arch/x86/kernel/vsyscall_64.c   |   59 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>  2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/vsyscall.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/vsyscall.h
> index bb710cb..d555973 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/vsyscall.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/vsyscall.h
> @@ -31,18 +31,6 @@ extern struct timezone sys_tz;
>  
>  extern void map_vsyscall(void);
>  
> -/* Emulation */
> -
> -static inline bool is_vsyscall_entry(unsigned long addr)
> -{
> -	return (addr & ~0xC00UL) == VSYSCALL_START;
> -}
> -
> -static inline int vsyscall_entry_nr(unsigned long addr)
> -{
> -	return (addr & 0xC00UL) >> 10;
> -}
> -
>  #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
>  
>  #endif /* _ASM_X86_VSYSCALL_H */
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/vsyscall_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/vsyscall_64.c
> index 10cd8ac..6d14848 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/vsyscall_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/vsyscall_64.c
> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
>  
>  #include <asm/vsyscall.h>
>  #include <asm/pgtable.h>
> +#include <asm/compat.h>
>  #include <asm/page.h>
>  #include <asm/unistd.h>
>  #include <asm/fixmap.h>
> @@ -97,33 +98,60 @@ static void warn_bad_vsyscall(const char *level, struct pt_regs *regs,
>  
>  	tsk = current;
>  
> -	printk("%s%s[%d] %s ip:%lx sp:%lx ax:%lx si:%lx di:%lx\n",
> +	printk("%s%s[%d] %s ip:%lx cs:%lx sp:%lx ax:%lx si:%lx di:%lx\n",
>  	       level, tsk->comm, task_pid_nr(tsk),
> -	       message, regs->ip - 2, regs->sp, regs->ax, regs->si, regs->di);
> +	       message, regs->ip - 2, regs->cs,
> +	       regs->sp, regs->ax, regs->si, regs->di);
> +}
> +
> +static int addr_to_vsyscall_nr(unsigned *vsyscall_nr, unsigned long addr)
> +{
> +	if ((addr & ~0xC00UL) != VSYSCALL_START)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	*vsyscall_nr = (addr & 0xC00UL) >> 10;
> +	if (*vsyscall_nr >= 3)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }

I'm wondering: why don't you make this function return negative value on
error, i.e. -EINVAL and the vsyscall number on success so that you can
get rid of returning it through the arg pointer?

Then at the callsite you can do:

	vsyscall_nr = addr_to_vsyscall_nr(addr);
	if (vsyscall_nr < 0)
		warn_bad_vsyscall(...)

?



>  
>  void dotraplinkage do_emulate_vsyscall(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
>  {
> -	const char *vsyscall_name;
>  	struct task_struct *tsk;
>  	unsigned long caller;
> -	int vsyscall_nr;
> +	unsigned vsyscall_nr;
>  	long ret;
>  
> -	/* Kernel code must never get here. */
> -	BUG_ON(!user_mode(regs));
> -
>  	local_irq_enable();
>  
>  	/*
> +	 * Real 64-bit user mode code has cs == __USER_CS.  Anything else
> +	 * is bogus.
> +	 */
> +	if (regs->cs != __USER_CS) {
> +		/*
> +		 * If we trapped from kernel mode, we might as well OOPS now
> +		 * instead of returning to some random address and OOPSing
> +		 * then.
> +		 */
> +		BUG_ON(!user_mode(regs));
> +
> +		/* Compat mode and non-compat 32-bit CS should both segfault. */
> +		warn_bad_vsyscall(KERN_WARNING, regs,
> +				  "illegal int 0xcc from 32-bit mode");
> +		goto sigsegv;
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
>  	 * x86-ism here: regs->ip points to the instruction after the int 0xcc,
>  	 * and int 0xcc is two bytes long.
>  	 */
> -	if (!is_vsyscall_entry(regs->ip - 2)) {
> -		warn_bad_vsyscall(KERN_WARNING, regs, "illegal int 0xcc (exploit attempt?)");
> +	if (addr_to_vsyscall_nr(&vsyscall_nr, regs->ip - 2) != 0) {
> +		warn_bad_vsyscall(KERN_WARNING, regs,
> +				  "illegal int 0xcc (exploit attempt?)");
>  		goto sigsegv;
>  	}
> -	vsyscall_nr = vsyscall_entry_nr(regs->ip - 2);
>  
>  	if (get_user(caller, (unsigned long __user *)regs->sp) != 0) {
>  		warn_bad_vsyscall(KERN_WARNING, regs, "int 0xcc with bad stack (exploit attempt?)");
> @@ -136,31 +164,20 @@ void dotraplinkage do_emulate_vsyscall(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
>  
>  	switch (vsyscall_nr) {
>  	case 0:
> -		vsyscall_name = "gettimeofday";
>  		ret = sys_gettimeofday(
>  			(struct timeval __user *)regs->di,
>  			(struct timezone __user *)regs->si);
>  		break;
>  
>  	case 1:
> -		vsyscall_name = "time";
>  		ret = sys_time((time_t __user *)regs->di);
>  		break;
>  
>  	case 2:
> -		vsyscall_name = "getcpu";
>  		ret = sys_getcpu((unsigned __user *)regs->di,
>  				 (unsigned __user *)regs->si,
>  				 0);
>  		break;
> -
> -	default:
> -		/*
> -		 * If we get here, then vsyscall_nr indicates that int 0xcc
> -		 * happened at an address in the vsyscall page that doesn't
> -		 * contain int 0xcc.  That can't happen.
> -		 */
> -		BUG();
>  	}
>  
>  	if (ret == -EFAULT) {
> -- 
> 1.7.6

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/