Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 22:01:45 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "jeyu@...nel.org" <jeyu@...nel.org>, "Hansen, Dave"
	<dave.hansen@...el.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>, "keescook@...omium.org"
	<keescook@...omium.org>, "linux-s390@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, "arjan@...ux.intel.com"
	<arjan@...ux.intel.com>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"linux-mips@...ux-mips.org" <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>, "Dock, Deneen T"
	<deneen.t.dock@...el.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"kristen@...ux.intel.com" <kristen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>, "mingo@...hat.com"
	<mingo@...hat.com>, "will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
	"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
	"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "davem@...emloft.net"
	<davem@...emloft.net>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"sparclinux@...r.kernel.org" <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] arm64/modules: Add rlimit checking for arm64
 modules

On Fri, 2018-10-12 at 16:32 +0200, Jessica Yu wrote:
> +++ Dave Hansen [11/10/18 16:47 -0700]:
> > On 10/11/2018 04:31 PM, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> > > +	if (check_inc_mod_rlimit(size))
> > > +		return NULL;
> > > +
> > >  	p = __vmalloc_node_range(size, MODULE_ALIGN, module_alloc_base,
> > >  				module_alloc_base + MODULES_VSIZE,
> > >  				gfp_mask, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, 0,
> > > @@ -65,6 +68,8 @@ void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
> > >  		return NULL;
> > >  	}
> > > 
> > > +	update_mod_rlimit(p, size);
> > 
> > Is there a reason we couldn't just rename all of the existing per-arch
> > module_alloc() calls to be called, say, "arch_module_alloc()", then put
> > this new rlimit code in a generic helper that does:
> > 
> > 
> > 	if (check_inc_mod_rlimit(size))
> > 		return NULL;
> > 
> > 	p = arch_module_alloc(...);
> > 
> > 	...
> > 
> > 	update_mod_rlimit(p, size);
> > 
> 
> I second this suggestion. Just make module_{alloc,memfree} generic,
> non-weak functions that call the rlimit helpers in addition to the
> arch-specific arch_module_{alloc,memfree} functions.
> 
> Jessica

Ok, thanks. I am going to try another version of this with just a system wide
BPF JIT limit based on the problems Jann brought up. I think it would be nice to
have a module space limit, but as far as I know the only way today un-privlidged 
users could fill the space is from BPF JIT. Unless you see another purpose long
term?

Rick

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.