Re: [RFCv2] arm64: support HAVE_ARCH_RARE_WRITE and HAVE_ARCH_RARE_WRITE_MEMCPY

[Ho-Eun Ryu]

> On 3 Apr 2017, at 4:11 PM, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On 3 April 2017 at 05:17, Ho-Eun Ryu <hoeun.ryu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 31 Mar 2017, at 6:25 PM, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 30 March 2017 at 15:39, Hoeun Ryu <hoeun.ryu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> This patch might be a part of Kees Cook's rare_write infrastructure series
>>>> for [1] for arm64 architecture.
>>>> 
>>>> This implementation is based on Mark Rutland's suggestions [2], which is
>>>> that a special userspace mm that maps only __start/end_rodata as RW permi-
>>>> ssion is prepared during early boot time (paging_init) and __arch_rare_-
>>>> write_begin() switches to the mm [2].
>>>> 
>>>> rare_write_mm address space is added for the special purpose and a page
>>>> global directory is also prepared for it. The mm remaps __start_rodata ~
>>>> __end_rodata to rodata_rw_alias_start which starts from TASK_SIZE_64 / 4
>>>> + kaslr_offset().
>>>> 
>>>> It passes LKDTM's rare write test.
>>>> 
>>>> [1] : http://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2017/02/27/5
>>>> [2] : https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/29/704
>>>> 
>>>> Signed-off-by: Hoeun Ryu <hoeun.ryu@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/arm64/Kconfig               |   2 +
>>>> arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h |   4 ++
>>>> arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c              | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 3 files changed, 107 insertions(+)
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>>>> index f2b0b52..6e2c592 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>>>> @@ -102,6 +102,8 @@ config ARM64
>>>>       select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS
>>>>       select HAVE_KPROBES
>>>>       select HAVE_KRETPROBES
>>>> +       select HAVE_ARCH_RARE_WRITE
>>>> +       select HAVE_ARCH_RARE_WRITE_MEMCPY
>>>>       select IOMMU_DMA if IOMMU_SUPPORT
>>>>       select IRQ_DOMAIN
>>>>       select IRQ_FORCED_THREADING
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>>>> index c213fdbd0..1514933 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
>>>> @@ -741,6 +741,10 @@ static inline void update_mmu_cache(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>>> #define kc_vaddr_to_offset(v)  ((v) & ~VA_START)
>>>> #define kc_offset_to_vaddr(o)  ((o) | VA_START)
>>>> 
>>>> +unsigned long __arch_rare_write_begin(void);
>>>> +unsigned long __arch_rare_write_end(void);
>>>> +void __arch_rare_write_memcpy(void *dst, const void *src, __kernel_size_t len);
>>>> +
>>> 
>>> If these hook into a generic framework, shouldn't these already be
>>> declared in a generic header file?
>> 
>> the generic header file doesn't declare arch-specific version of api.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> #endif /* !__ASSEMBLY__ */
>>>> 
>>>> #endif /* __ASM_PGTABLE_H */
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>>>> index 91502e3..86b25c9 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>>>> @@ -570,6 +570,105 @@ static void __init map_kernel(pgd_t *pgd)
>>>>       kasan_copy_shadow(pgd);
>>>> }
>>>> 
>>>> +struct mm_struct rare_write_mm = {
>>> 
>>> static please
>> 
>> OK, add static.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> +       .mm_rb          = RB_ROOT,
>>>> +       .mm_users       = ATOMIC_INIT(2),
>>>> +       .mm_count       = ATOMIC_INIT(1),
>>>> +       .mmap_sem       = __RWSEM_INITIALIZER(rare_write_mm.mmap_sem),
>>>> +       .page_table_lock= __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(rare_write_mm.page_table_lock),
>>>> +       .mmlist         = LIST_HEAD_INIT(rare_write_mm.mmlist),
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_PTDUMP_DEBUGFS
>>>> +#include <asm/ptdump.h>
>>>> +
>>>> +static struct ptdump_info rare_write_ptdump_info = {
>>>> +       .mm             = &rare_write_mm,
>>>> +       .markers        = (struct addr_marker[]){
>>>> +               { 0,            "rare-write start" },
>>>> +               { TASK_SIZE_64, "rare-write end" }
>>>> +       },
>>>> +       .base_addr      = 0,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +static int __init ptdump_init(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +       return ptdump_debugfs_register(&rare_write_ptdump_info,
>>>> +                                      "rare_write_page_tables");
>>>> +}
>>>> +device_initcall(ptdump_init);
>>>> +
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>> +__always_inline unsigned long __arch_rare_write_begin(void)
>>> 
>>> These functions are not called from the same compilation unit, so what
>>> do you think __always_inline buys you here?
>> 
>> The first patch of Kee's series ([PATCH 01/11] Introduce rare_write() infrastructure) [1] says some requirements and one of these is the arch-specific helpers should be inline to avoid making them ROP targets.
>> 
>> So I'd make sure the helpers are inline.
>> 
>> [1] : http://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2017/03/29/16
>> 
> 
> OK, that explains a number of issues with this patch.
> 
> Please understand that marking a function inline has *no* effect
> whatsoever if the C definition is not visible to the caller. This is
> why the C declarations in the header file are not made generic: these
> functions are supposed to be *defined* as static inline in header
> files.

Thank you for the guidance.

> 
> So please move these implementations into the header files, and mark
> them static inline. This means the rare_write_mm structure should
> *not* be made static either.
> 

OK, Iâll fix this in the next version.

> 
>>> 
>>>> +{
>>>> +       struct mm_struct *mm = &rare_write_mm;
>>>> +
>>>> +       preempt_disable();
>>>> +
>>>> +       __switch_mm(mm);
>>>> +
>>>> +       if (system_uses_ttbr0_pan()) {
>>>> +               update_saved_ttbr0(current, mm);
>>>> +               cpu_switch_mm(mm->pgd, mm);
>>>> +       }
>>>> +
>>>> +       return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +__always_inline unsigned long __arch_rare_write_end(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +       struct mm_struct *mm = current->active_mm;
>>>> +
>>>> +       __switch_mm(mm);
>>>> +
>>>> +       if (system_uses_ttbr0_pan()) {
>>>> +               cpu_set_reserved_ttbr0();
>>>> +               if (mm != &init_mm)
>>>> +                       update_saved_ttbr0(current, mm);
>>>> +       }
>>>> +
>>>> +       preempt_enable_no_resched();
>>>> +
>>>> +       return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static unsigned long rodata_rw_alias_start __ro_after_init = TASK_SIZE_64 / 4;
>>>> +
>>>> +__always_inline void __arch_rare_write_memcpy(void *dst, const void *src,
>>>> +                                             __kernel_size_t len)
>>>> +{
>>>> +       unsigned long __dst = (unsigned long)dst;
>>>> +
>>>> +       __dst -= (unsigned long)__start_rodata;
>>>> +       __dst += rodata_rw_alias_start;
>>>> +
>>>> +       memcpy((void *)__dst, src, len);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +void __init rare_write_init(void)
>>> 
>>> static please
>> 
>> OK, add static.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> +{
>>>> +       phys_addr_t pgd_phys = early_pgtable_alloc();
>>>> +       pgd_t *pgd = (pgd_t *)__phys_to_virt(pgd_phys);
>>>> +       phys_addr_t pa_start = __pa_symbol(__start_rodata);
>>>> +       unsigned long size = __end_rodata - __start_rodata;
>>>> +
>>>> +       BUG_ON(!PAGE_ALIGNED(pa_start));
>>>> +       BUG_ON(!PAGE_ALIGNED(size));
>>>> +
>>>> +       rodata_rw_alias_start += kaslr_offset();
>>>> +
>>> 
>>> This places the rodata alias at a fixed offset from the original,
>>> right, even under KASLR? Given that they are completely independent, I
>>> think you can use a random offset here rather than the same offset we
>>> use for vmlinux.
>> 
>> What I did here is just to randomize the base of rw alias mapping when kaslr is enabled.
>> You're right it's completely independent from kaslr though, I would like to add randomization for rw alias base address by using simple solution in early boot stage.
>> 
>> I' ll think again to achieve randomization or just remove it.
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> +       BUG_ON(rodata_rw_alias_start + size > TASK_SIZE_64);
>>>> +
>>>> +       rare_write_mm.pgd = pgd;
>>> 
>>> For correctness, you should add a call to mm_init_cpumask() here,
>>> although it doesn't matter in practice on arm64.
>> 
>> OK, I'll fix this.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> +       init_new_context(NULL, &rare_write_mm);
>>>> +
>>>> +       __create_pgd_mapping(pgd,
>>>> +                            pa_start, rodata_rw_alias_start, size,
>>>> +                            __pgprot(pgprot_val(PAGE_KERNEL) | PTE_NG),
>>>> +                            early_pgtable_alloc, debug_pagealloc_enabled());
>>> 
>>> This needs to be updated after the changes that are now queued in the
>>> arm64 tree for v4.12
>>> 
>>> BTW you can allow page/cont mappings in all cases, no need for the
>>> debug_pagealloc_enabled() check
>> 
>> I will rebase this onto the version you mentioned later.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> /*
>>>> * paging_init() sets up the page tables, initialises the zone memory
>>>> * maps and sets up the zero page.
>>>> @@ -603,6 +702,8 @@ void __init paging_init(void)
>>>>        */
>>>>       memblock_free(__pa_symbol(swapper_pg_dir) + PAGE_SIZE,
>>>>                     SWAPPER_DIR_SIZE - PAGE_SIZE);
>>>> +
>>>> +       rare_write_init();
>>>> }
>>>> 
>>>> /*
>>>> --
>>>> 2.7.4
>>>> 
>> 
>> Thank you very much for the review