Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 16:54:27 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bpetkov@suse.de>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@google.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
        Eduardo Valentin <eduval@amazon.com>, aliguori@amazon.com,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [patch 05/16] mm: Allow special mappings with user access cleared
Message-ID: <20171213155427.p24i2xdh2s65e4d2@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20171212173221.496222173@linutronix.de>
 <20171212173333.669577588@linutronix.de>
 <CALCETrXLeGGw+g7GiGDmReXgOxjB-cjmehdryOsFK4JB5BJAFQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171213122211.bxcb7xjdwla2bqol@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20171213125739.fllckbl3o4nonmpx@node.shutemov.name>
 <b303fac7-34af-5065-f996-4494fb8c09a2@intel.com>
 <20171213153202.qtxnloxoc66lhsbf@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <e6ef40c8-8966-c973-3ae4-ac9475699e40@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e6ef40c8-8966-c973-3ae4-ac9475699e40@intel.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 938
Lines: 26

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 07:47:46AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/13/2017 07:32 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> This will fault writing a byte to 'addr':
> >>
> >> 	char *addr = malloc(PAGE_SIZE);
> >> 	pkey_mprotect(addr, PAGE_SIZE, 13);
> >> 	pkey_deny_access(13);
> >> 	*addr[0] = 'f';
> >>
> >> But this will write one byte to addr successfully (if it uses the kernel
> >> mapping of the physical page backing 'addr'):
> >>
> >> 	char *addr = malloc(PAGE_SIZE);
> >> 	pkey_mprotect(addr, PAGE_SIZE, 13);
> >> 	pkey_deny_access(13);
> >> 	read(fd, addr, 1);
> >>
> > This seems confused to me; why are these two cases different?
> 
> Protection keys doesn't work in the kernel direct map, so if the read()
> was implemented by writing to the direct map alias of 'addr' then this
> would bypass protection keys.

Which is why get_user_pages() _should_ enforce this.

What use are protection keys if you can trivially circumvent them?