Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 3 Oct 2022 20:59:04 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To:     "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
Cc:     "bsingharora@gmail.com" <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
        "hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "Syromiatnikov, Eugene" <esyr@redhat.com>,
        "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "rdunlap@infradead.org" <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        "kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        "Eranian, Stephane" <eranian@google.com>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "fweimer@redhat.com" <fweimer@redhat.com>,
        "nadav.amit@gmail.com" <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
        "jannh@google.com" <jannh@google.com>,
        "dethoma@microsoft.com" <dethoma@microsoft.com>,
        "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        "kcc@google.com" <kcc@google.com>, "bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
        "oleg@redhat.com" <oleg@redhat.com>,
        "hjl.tools@gmail.com" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
        "Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@intel.com>,
        "Lutomirski, Andy" <luto@kernel.org>,
        "pavel@ucw.cz" <pavel@ucw.cz>, "arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
        "Moreira, Joao" <joao.moreira@intel.com>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "mike.kravetz@oracle.com" <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "jamorris@linux.microsoft.com" <jamorris@linux.microsoft.com>,
        "john.allen@amd.com" <john.allen@amd.com>,
        "rppt@kernel.org" <rppt@kernel.org>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        "corbet@lwn.net" <corbet@lwn.net>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-api@vger.kernel.org" <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        "gorcunov@gmail.com" <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/39] Shadowstacks for userspace
Message-ID: <202210032058.D17B1A3@keescook>
References: <20220929222936.14584-1-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
 <202210030946.CB90B94C11@keescook>
 <7c85acd79688c5ea41f760535612ef77093a41c7.camel@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <7c85acd79688c5ea41f760535612ef77093a41c7.camel@intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 06:33:52PM +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-10-03 at 10:04 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > Shadow stack signal format
> > > --------------------------
> > > So to handle alt shadow stacks we need to push some data onto a
> > > stack. To 
> > > prevent SROP we need to push something to the shadow stack that the
> > > kernel can 
> > > [...]
> > > shadow stack return address or a shadow stack tokens. To make sure
> > > it can’t be 
> > > used, data is pushed with the high bit (bit 63) set. This bit is a
> > > linear 
> > > address bit in both the token format and a normal return address,
> > > so it should 
> > > not conflict with anything. It puts any return address in the
> > > kernel half of 
> > > the address space, so would never be created naturally by a
> > > userspace program. 
> > > It will not be a valid restore token either, as the kernel address
> > > will never 
> > > be pointing to the previous frame in the shadow stack.
> > > 
> > > When a signal hits, the format pushed to the stack that is handling
> > > the signal 
> > > is four 8 byte values (since we are 64 bit only):
> > > > 1...old SSP|1...alt stack size|1...alt stack base|0|
> > 
> > Do these end up being non-canonical addresses? (To avoid confusion
> > with
> > "real" kernel addresses?)
> 
> Usually, but not necessarily with LAM. LAM cannot mask bit 63 though.
> So hypothetically they could become "real" kernel addresses some day.
> To keep them in the user half but still make sure they are not usable,
> you would either have to encode the bits over a lot of entries which
> would use extra space, or shrink the available address space, which
> could cause compatibility problems.
> 
> Do you think it's an issue?

Nah; I think it's a good solution. I was just trying to make sure I
understood it correctly. Thanks!

-- 
Kees Cook