[PATCHv5 7/7] arm64: add better page protections to arm64

[Mark Rutland]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 05:38:07PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 19 November 2014 17:31, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com> wrote:
> > Hi Laura,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:55:05AM +0000, Laura Abbott wrote:
> >> Add page protections for arm64 similar to those in arm.
> >> This is for security reasons to prevent certain classes
> >> of exploits. The current method:
> >>
> >> - Map all memory as either RWX or RW. We round to the nearest
> >>   section to avoid creating page tables before everything is mapped
> >> - Once everything is mapped, if either end of the RWX section should
> >>   not be X, we split the PMD and remap as necessary
> >> - When initmem is to be freed, we change the permissions back to
> >>   RW (using stop machine if necessary to flush the TLB)
> >> - If CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA is set, the read only sections are set
> >>   read only.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <lauraa at codeaurora.org>
> >> ---
> >> v5:
> >>  -Dropped map_io from the alloc_init_* functions
> >>  -Fixed a bug in split_pud and cleaned it up per suggestions from Steve
> >>  -Aligned _etext up to SECTION_SIZE of DEBUG_ALIGN_RODATA is enabled to ensure
> >>   that the section mapping is actually kept and we don't leak any RWX regions
> >>  -Dropped some old ioremap code that somehow snuck in from the last rebase
> >>  -Fixed create_id_mapping to use the early mapping since efi_idmap_init is
> >>   called early
> >> ---
> >>  arch/arm64/Kconfig.debug            |  23 +++
> >>  arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h |   4 +
> >>  arch/arm64/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S     |  20 +++
> >>  arch/arm64/mm/init.c                |   1 +
> >>  arch/arm64/mm/mm.h                  |   2 +
> >>  arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c                 | 289 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >>  6 files changed, 298 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
> >
> > Unfortuantely this is blowing up on my Juno atop of v3.18-rc5, because
> > EFI runtime services seem to get mapped as non-executable, and at boot
> > we tried to read the RTC via runtime services:
> >
> > Bad mode in Synchronous Abort handler detected, code 0x8600000d
> > CPU: 1 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 3.18.0-rc5+ #23
> > task: ffffffc9768b8000 ti: ffffffc9768c0000 task.ti: ffffffc9768c0000
> > PC is at 0xffffffc97ffaa3e4
> > LR is at virt_efi_get_time+0x60/0xa0
> > pc : [<ffffffc97ffaa3e4>] lr : [<ffffffc00044a6c8>] pstate: 800000c5
> > sp : ffffffc9768c39e0
> > x29: ffffffc9768c39e0 x28: ffffffc000723c90
> > x27: ffffffc0007b5678 x26: 0000000000000001
> > x25: ffffffc000584320 x24: ffffffc0006aaeb0
> > x23: ffffffc9768c3a60 x22: 0000000000000040
> > x21: ffffffc97ffaa3e4 x20: ffffffc0007b5a48
> > x19: ffffffc0007b5a40 x18: 0000000000000007
> > x17: 000000000000000e x16: 0000000000000001
> > x15: 0000000000000007 x14: 0ffffffffffffffe
> > x13: ffffffbe22feb720 x12: 0000000000000030
> > x11: 0000000000000003 x10: 0000000000000068
> > x9 : 0000000000000000 x8 : ffffffc97f981c00
> > x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 000000000000003f
> > x5 : 0000000000000040 x4 : 000000097f6c8000
> > x3 : 0000000000000000 x2 : 000000097f6c8000
> > x1 : ffffffc9768c3a50 x0 : ffffffc9768c3a60
> >
> > Ard, is this issue solved by any current series, or do we need to do
> > anything additional to ensure runtime services are mapped appropriately
> > for DEBUG_RODATA kernels?
> >
> 
> This problem will just vanish with my uefi virtmap series, because
> then UEFI manages its own page tables.
> I use PXN for everything except EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE (which
> [sadly] contains read-write data as well, due to how the PE/COFF
> loader in UEFI usually implemented, i.e., it allocates one single
> region to hold the entire static image, including .data and .bss).
> Once these changes land, the UEFI page tables will only be active
> during actual Runtime Services calls, so the attack service should be
> reduced substantially.
> 
> For now, i guess adding a set_memory_x() in remap_region() for
> EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE should suffice?

Do we map that as module memory? I see change_memory_common (backing
set_memory_x) will fail if:

	(!is_module_address(start) || !is_module_address(end - 1)

If it is, I guess that will work for now.

Mark.