[PATCH v10 2/3] arm/syscalls: Check address limit on user-mode return

[Thomas Garnier]

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Thomas Garnier <thgarnie at google.com> wrote:
>> Ensure the address limit is a user-mode segment before returning to
>> user-mode. Otherwise a process can corrupt kernel-mode memory and
>> elevate privileges [1].
>>
>> The set_fs function sets the TIF_SETFS flag to force a slow path on
>> return. In the slow path, the address limit is checked to be USER_DS if
>> needed.
>>
>> The TIF_SETFS flag is added to _TIF_WORK_MASK shifting _TIF_SYSCALL_WORK
>> for arm instruction immediate support. The global work mask is too big
>> to used on a single instruction so adapt ret_fast_syscall.
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=990
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie at google.com>
>> ---
>> v10 redesigns the change to use work flags on set_fs as recommended by
>> Linus and agreed by others.
>>
>> Based on next-20170609
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/include/asm/thread_info.h | 15 +++++++++------
>>  arch/arm/include/asm/uaccess.h     |  2 ++
>>  arch/arm/kernel/entry-common.S     |  9 +++++++--
>>  arch/arm/kernel/signal.c           |  5 +++++
>>  4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> index 776757d1604a..1d468b527b7b 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/thread_info.h
>> @@ -139,10 +139,11 @@ extern int vfp_restore_user_hwstate(struct user_vfp __user *,
>>  #define TIF_NEED_RESCHED       1       /* rescheduling necessary */
>>  #define TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME      2       /* callback before returning to user */
>>  #define TIF_UPROBE             3       /* breakpointed or singlestepping */
>> -#define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE      4       /* syscall trace active */
>> -#define TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT      5       /* syscall auditing active */
>> -#define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 6       /* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */
>> -#define TIF_SECCOMP            7       /* seccomp syscall filtering active */
>> +#define TIF_FSCHECK            4       /* Check FS is USER_DS on return */
>> +#define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE      5       /* syscall trace active */
>> +#define TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT      6       /* syscall auditing active */
>> +#define TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT 7       /* syscall tracepoint instrumentation */
>> +#define TIF_SECCOMP            8       /* seccomp syscall filtering active */
>>
>>  #define TIF_NOHZ               12      /* in adaptive nohz mode */
>>  #define TIF_USING_IWMMXT       17
>> @@ -153,6 +154,7 @@ extern int vfp_restore_user_hwstate(struct user_vfp __user *,
>>  #define _TIF_NEED_RESCHED      (1 << TIF_NEED_RESCHED)
>>  #define _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME     (1 << TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME)
>>  #define _TIF_UPROBE            (1 << TIF_UPROBE)
>> +#define _TIF_FSCHECK           (1 << TIF_FSCHECK)
>>  #define _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE     (1 << TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE)
>>  #define _TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT     (1 << TIF_SYSCALL_AUDIT)
>>  #define _TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT        (1 << TIF_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINT)
>> @@ -166,8 +168,9 @@ extern int vfp_restore_user_hwstate(struct user_vfp __user *,
>>  /*
>>   * Change these and you break ASM code in entry-common.S
>>   */
>> -#define _TIF_WORK_MASK         (_TIF_NEED_RESCHED | _TIF_SIGPENDING | \
>> -                                _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_UPROBE)
>> +#define _TIF_WORK_MASK         (_TIF_NEED_RESCHED | _TIF_SIGPENDING |  \
>> +                                _TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME | _TIF_UPROBE |     \
>> +                                _TIF_FSCHECK)
>>
>>  #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
>>  #endif /* __ASM_ARM_THREAD_INFO_H */
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/uaccess.h
>> index 2577405d082d..6cc882223e34 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/uaccess.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/uaccess.h
>> @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ static inline void set_fs(mm_segment_t fs)
>>  {
>>         current_thread_info()->addr_limit = fs;
>>         modify_domain(DOMAIN_KERNEL, fs ? DOMAIN_CLIENT : DOMAIN_MANAGER);
>> +       /* On user-mode return, check fs is correct */
>> +       set_thread_flag(TIF_FSCHECK);
>>  }
>>
>>  #define segment_eq(a, b)       ((a) == (b))
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/entry-common.S b/arch/arm/kernel/entry-common.S
>> index eb5cd77bf1d8..e33c32d56193 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/entry-common.S
>> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/entry-common.S
>> @@ -41,7 +41,9 @@ ret_fast_syscall:
>>   UNWIND(.cantunwind    )
>>         disable_irq_notrace                     @ disable interrupts
>>         ldr     r1, [tsk, #TI_FLAGS]            @ re-check for syscall tracing
>> -       tst     r1, #_TIF_SYSCALL_WORK | _TIF_WORK_MASK
>> +       tst     r1, #_TIF_SYSCALL_WORK
>> +       bne     fast_work_pending
>> +       tst     r1, #_TIF_WORK_MASK
>
> (IIUC) MOV32 is 2 cycles (MOVW, MOVT), and each TST above is 1 cycle
> and each BNE is 1 cycle (when not taken). So:
>
> mov32 r2, #_TIF_SYSCALL_WORK | _TIF_WORK_MASK
> tst r1, r2
> bne fast_work_pending
>
> is 4 cycles and tst, bne, tst, bne is also 4 cycles. Would mov32 be
> more readable (since it keeps the flags together)?

I guess it would be more readable. Any opinion from the arm folks?

>
> -Kees
>
> --
> Kees Cook
> Pixel Security



-- 
Thomas