On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 01:18:47AM +0530, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:50 PM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutl...@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 08:07:49PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> >> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 10:47:15AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 07:22:03PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> >> > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 08:58:00PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> > > > On 12 March 2018 at 20:14, Bhupesh Sharma <bhsha...@redhat.com> 
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > More importantly, neither arm64 _kexec_ supports kaslr.
> 
> Sorry if my earlier email was not clear on this, but I meant both the
> kdump/kexec cases.
> 
> While for kdump there is no current requirement for physical
> randomization, for kexec it would be good to support the same as the
> primary kernel was already supporting kaslr and the secondary kernel
> (if compiled with CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE) would randomizes the virtual
> address at which the kernel image is loaded.
> 
> If we have physical randomization supported in this case in the
> secondary/kexec kernel we can avoid potential misuse related to the
> physical address being known at which the secondary/kexec kernel is
> loaded.
> 
> >> >
> >> > The below is just considering this, and ignoring kdump (where I don't
> >> > think we care at all about KASLR).
> >> >
> >> > > Currently kexec-tools is set to determine where the kernel actually be
> >> > > loaded, using a constant offset, text_offset, which comes from an 
> >> > > image's
> >> > > boot header and relocation of an image to the load address is performed
> >> > > at the very end of the first kernel without knowing whether the 2nd 
> >> > > kernel
> >> > > has kaslr support enabled or not.
> >> >
> >> > The kexec tools shouldn't need to know whether the kernel supports KASLR
> >> > at all.
> >> >
> >> > If the new kernel image has bit 3 (Kernel physical placement) set, kexec
> >> > tools can choose to randomize the physical load address, regardless of
> >> > whether that kernel has KASLR enabled.
> >>
> >> So, by definition, is randomness, if we say so, in physical address not
> >> part of KASLR?
> >
> > Physical randomization is not part of the kernel's KASLR implementation.
> >
> > We happen to do it in the EFI stub, because we can in that context. But
> > generally, physical randomization is not part of arm64's in-kernel
> > KASLR.
> >
> > For various reasons, the physical address that the kernel is loaded to
> > may be arbitrary, so we have to cope with physical randomization
> > regardless.
> 
> Indeed, since the primary kernel depends on the  firmware's
> EFI_RNG_PROTOCOL implementation (if available) to randomise the
> physical location of the kernel Image, for the secondary/kexec kernel,
> if can have two approaches to enable physical randomization:

I believe that you're now talking about "virtual" randomization.

> - Implement a UEFI stub for loading the kexec kernel as well, or
> 
> - Extend the 'kexec-tools' to invoke the entropy source available in
> the primary kernel (provided by the firmware via EFI_RNG_PROTOCOL)  to
> generate a random seed to randomize the physical address and populate
> it in the '/chosen/kaslr-seed' property of the device-tree being
> passed to the secondary/kexec kernel and let the normal code flow in
> ' arch/arm64/kernel/kaslr.c', function 'kaslr_early_init' to get the
> seed for the secondary kernel from the '/chosen/kaslr-seed' property
> itself.
> 
> Personally the later approach looks simpler to me from a implementation p-o-v.

If kaslr-seed has a critical value in terms of security, is kexec-tools
a right place? It is exposed to user space albeit for a short time of period.

(Speaking of kexec_file, we can easily adopt this approach as fdt modification
is done totally inside the kernel. Likewise, "physical" randomization would be
easy in part of arm64_relocate_new_kernel() because we only have to care bit 3
of boot header's flags after Mark's comment.)

-Takahiro AKASHI

> For example, currently in the kernel we normally invoke 'update_fdt'
> (inside 'drivers/fimrware/efi/libstub/fdt.c') from the UEFI stub,
> wherein we have this check for CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE:
> 
> static efi_status_t update_fdt(efi_system_table_t *sys_table, void *orig_fdt,
>                    unsigned long orig_fdt_size,
>                    void *fdt, int new_fdt_size, char *cmdline_ptr,
>                    u64 initrd_addr, u64 initrd_size)
> {
> 
> ...
>     if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE)) {
>         efi_status_t efi_status;
> 
>         efi_status = efi_get_random_bytes(sys_table, sizeof(fdt_val64),
>                           (u8 *)&fdt_val64);
>         if (efi_status == EFI_SUCCESS) {
>             status = fdt_setprop(fdt, node, "kaslr-seed",
>                          &fdt_val64, sizeof(fdt_val64));
>             if (status)
>                 goto fdt_set_fail;
>         } else if (efi_status != EFI_NOT_FOUND) {
>             return efi_status;
>         }
>     }
> ...
> }
> 
> I am thinking of modifying the kexec-tools code for arm64 (which
> already processes the device tree to pass it to the secondary/kexec
> kernel), so that we can do something like the following:
> 
>         --> efi_get_random_bytes(sys_table, sizeof(fdt_val64),
>                           (u8 *)&fdt_val64);
>         ------> fdt_setprop(fdt, node, "kaslr-seed", &fdt_val64,
> sizeof(fdt_val64));
> 
> Now when the modified dtb is passed to the secondary/kexec kernel it
> will automatically find a valid seed, will wipe it to zero for
> security reasons and use the same to perform physical randomization.
> 
> If this looks sensible I will try to take a stab at this approach and
> share results on thread in the coming days.
> Please share your inputs.
> 
> Regards,
> Bhupesh

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

Reply via email to