Message ID | 20230213045351.3945824-1-debug@rivosinc.com |
---|---|
Headers |
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org> Delivered-To: ouuuleilei@gmail.com Received: by 2002:adf:eb09:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id s9csp2175235wrn; Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:55:10 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/yn0uUhjH4iz1vW3l5pW5Hiex2qLS0OrIG1A2r5XnMgMJnEGYYsJR2JJ8o6xFdjgC/4r2n X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1e0e:b0:233:5e3a:6d09 with SMTP id pg14-20020a17090b1e0e00b002335e3a6d09mr12973830pjb.38.1676264110625; Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:55:10 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1676264110; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=q1L7HLogMLCEe3uaFfX3uwysCb1pc2m0KGG5OdP2gNCSwkcuHxoyawYkIwN7iO0Ww6 9AJJGsnfbr67EMSDz7EJsXJyHpqSdFDS0I0g9VteGkA0AKrc+si0+BEtIwQKuPJDplhE o2pCkGaZdPeWltIP5yanfD3/1tvCVm2wZsgdS0s0Fq0mPiybgnoPCxjHSPZHieXjkDUQ pDzJWqXvoonMZbsRFUWIzRRseg+Yv+Je1VByyhCf2Fc74HqCG+yk772nfxasWgxd/tLR Wxkwkky8yilrkPFK+8nxffGhynzv4x9w6d+NqF9JGqg+d2rL1Jnk7LGrn70a8QqWSkOv Ku0Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:dkim-signature; bh=tTK+xfsR0j+xCNHQsqpg9k6oGbLrp123IoZ4WeUeiW0=; b=M6FqrilLNa4Auy7zA7RZPu1ACAbOitffxbZtLUfFol5reNV90ZH9eiOxEhh9ADqo8Z fNTa08Zr95M4S2kvIuPqgAkiutwhiEQJqXUDqS0aZPFxy4o/dTWg/zYmCtHYMnd2Kwih 9D/lopqxVoCuecLpyky407rjIA08a+GTgBV74GOnlJIuRcaoqxCJcs+SXDIUTDQZv49x AHO9NiDf85TwIVCnZggYCicfhQMz8w4+wqFcqpHH1wDFID+JBc8VlsJ1lTMh+SLFgeQD 8IHVtyuuXQurbEVJyvVMAz/MWoPwR4n+BfnAr0oMnLNFm226HFBjFLbc9Zd1N6unZJsq uYDA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@rivosinc-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.s=20210112 header.b=br3K0OFL; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id m15-20020a17090a3f8f00b0022c09c603bdsi6688889pjc.118.2023.02.12.20.54.58; Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:55:10 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@rivosinc-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.s=20210112 header.b=br3K0OFL; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229711AbjBMEyG (ORCPT <rfc822;tebrre53rla2o@gmail.com> + 99 others); Sun, 12 Feb 2023 23:54:06 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51096 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229472AbjBMEyF (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>); Sun, 12 Feb 2023 23:54:05 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x102b.google.com (mail-pj1-x102b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEEC8469B for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:54:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x102b.google.com with SMTP id v6-20020a17090ad58600b00229eec90a7fso13049580pju.0 for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:54:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rivosinc-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=tTK+xfsR0j+xCNHQsqpg9k6oGbLrp123IoZ4WeUeiW0=; b=br3K0OFLOLof60ras95igFKBghZGWly2Q/NOKBv+SdHVbeiNa/5kkviR8DuUOzHb5B XvJNmvmT4N381bU88daxdzoQ2tkb6utSR+ZHqJZujHFnB6nWMMHFdKDvPKReWKLwubJW 0Chmt8KyjudEpkvTZ6Q0ZWEk8qdNzI8J+L5ZFB3mrXQQhyutoqvrYDixJkWEolbrpnn6 9rPlCtIfOd+YZTbHm16JCqxUJwdV5BQ4j5KMAb3YOxzu/CwtRI9pOWwC75Ok7mgjKSUZ hJUikhZNY6X4T542UhOYRi63eacekCJIXRTwaBOk25rrdwYEEhzOVKZaFdSv7rO5EuxC VcxQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=tTK+xfsR0j+xCNHQsqpg9k6oGbLrp123IoZ4WeUeiW0=; b=64qzLBtiF+hPCr0JjFUuP8Eo8qoJProWk6wioDfsaeqjps7GRzhby2DbguroNDuG0e dxflTYL4H+cZY4XWvPEAiRSsL63LjSRk/JGNH9Ugx8wDLQ5+4dKRik8eM/qw0FskGh+i e8xMokz96Aq8KOSRccwiaRCP8nrMZVEc0kBIV+Lrz/A2vvnTy8bRhpz+4GMlhnLDTMWq nz6SZpa+ljMsPw7WjkJ9hAB0PP8Hyp2RnMcILV6mBq3wKTjae510roFQ2Zw8Ov3iZ74y UTQp4asU6bk4B+WZ/z2CZeh+1MMpKGYAl1WBklUOb3KiXwipIR6qWq+LYXJM33XTu8GD u85g== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXR2X8aKaPRrH/hltK0UynkaoUr4N249V5LVnB+5nvhs0Z/602S jNdriIvtxl1iGFPOB4DfbpoT+Hb/yo+56Xle X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:4091:b0:19a:73f7:675f with SMTP id z17-20020a170903409100b0019a73f7675fmr7653867plc.60.1676264041975; Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:54:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from debug.ba.rivosinc.com ([66.220.2.162]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e5-20020a170902784500b00189e7cb8b89sm7078303pln.127.2023.02.12.20.54.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:54:01 -0800 (PST) From: Deepak Gupta <debug@rivosinc.com> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>, Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu> Cc: Deepak Gupta <debug@rivosinc.com> Subject: [PATCH v1 RFC Zisslpcfi 00/20] riscv control-flow integrity for U mode Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2023 20:53:29 -0800 Message-Id: <20230213045351.3945824-1-debug@rivosinc.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: =?utf-8?q?INBOX?= X-GMAIL-THRID: =?utf-8?q?1757690316454078649?= X-GMAIL-MSGID: =?utf-8?q?1757690316454078649?= |
Series |
riscv control-flow integrity for U mode
|
|
Message
Deepak Gupta
Feb. 13, 2023, 4:53 a.m. UTC
Hello All, I've been working on linux support for shadow stack and landing pad instruction on riscv for a while. These are still RFC quality. But atleast they're in a shape which can start a discussion and I can get some feedback. So I decided to sending out patches. This patch series implements `zisslpcfi` extension which helps software to enforce control-flow integrity (cfi) on riscv CPUs. Currently spec is called zisslpcfi [1] spec. This literally means "unprivileged integer shadow stack & landing pad based control-flow integrity". Three major architectures [1, 2, 3] either already support or have indicated support for control flow integrity extensions based on shadow stack (for backward edge) and landing pads for indirect call/jmp (for forward edge). Since these mechanisms are solving one common security issue (control flow hijacking attacks) plaguing software ecosystem, there're bound to be common similarities and thus need of abstracting or having common code. These commonalities are: - Concept of shadow stack for program - Protection of shadow stack from regular stores but still allowing return address to be store via special mechanism(s) - Concept of indirect branch tracking and thus landing pad instruction as target for indirect branches. Due to commonality in three arches for shadow stack and landing pad instr support, patch series defines following arch-agnostic configs: - CONFIG_USER_SHADOW_STACK: Selecting this config means kernel will have support for programs compiled with optin of shadow stacks. - CONFIG_USER_INDIRECT_BR_LP: Selecting this config means kernel will have support for program compiled with optin of landing pad instructions on indirect branches. There're stubs for abstraction on non-riscv architectures and specific implementation for riscv architecture. Architecture owners can implement those stubs abstractions on respective architectures to implement shadow stack and branch tracking mechanism. Additional highlights of this patch series specifically targeted towards implementation of `zisslpcfi` Shadow stack and landing pad state ---------------------------------- On riscv I choose to insert shadow stack and landing pad state in thread_info. pt_regs is one choice but I didn't see a compelling reason to put these in pt_regs. If you do have a compelling reason to put this in pt_regs, we can make that change. Shadow stack ------------ Shadow stack is already present on x86 [2] and is going to be part of riscv and aarch64 [3] architecture. Since shadow stack are writeable memory but at the same time are not allowed to be writeable by regular stores. They have special meaning and this patch series proposes a new `mmap` protection flag `PROT_SHADOWSTACK`. Repsective architecture can choose to implement this memory protection. With respect to vma flags, riscv implementation chooses to have only `VM_WRITE` as shadow stack meaning and is analogous to riscv architecture's PTE encodings (X=0,R=0,W=1) as shadow stack. On riscv, all stores to shadow stack memory raise access store faults. Similarly all shadow stack load and stores on non-shadow stack memory (but valid) will raise access load/store faults. This patch series creates a synthetic exception code (=14) which is reserved in privileged spec and feeds that into common page fault handling routine. ELF parsing ------------ There're two ways to enable forward cfi and backward cfi - prctls: `ld` can issue prctls to enable it on the runtime. - elf marker: Some sort of marker in elf header which kernel can recognize and setup forward and backward cfi state. This patch series uses .note.gnu.property section and assumes two flags exist there for forward cfi and backward cfi, if present kernel setups the respective cfi state. Please note that this part will change because risc-v is moving towards using `.riscv.attributes` section to host such flags. So I'll change the implementation in future revisions. Signal & ucontext ------------------ This patch series steals 4(32bit)/8(64bit) bytes from a padding structure in ucontext. This padding exist for future use case which we don't know yet. But stealing few bytes from this padding allows us to keep the structure size same and save some compatiblity issues. Signal patches still need some work (have to work out a shadow stack token save on signal delivery and restore mechanism on sigreturn. This will prevent any abuse of sigreturns to hijack control flow) Audit mode ----------- Since this is a RFC, current set of patches suppresses cfi violations in program and let the program make forward progress. However this shouldn't be allowed by default and can be built into a policy. More on `zisslpcfi` riscv extension ------------------------------------ zisslpcfi (CFI) extends ISA in following manner: Forward cfi (indirect call/jmp) - Landing pad instruction requirement for indirect call/jmp All indirect call and jump must land on landing pad instruction `lpcll` else CPU will raise illegal instruction exception. `lpcll` stands for land pad check lower label. - Static label (25bit label) checking instructions for indirect call/jmp Extension provides mechanism using which a compiler generated label value can be set in a designated CSR at call site and it can be checked at the call target. If mismatch happens, CPU will raise illegal instruction exception. Compiler can generate hash based on function signature type. Extension provide mechanisms using which label value is part of the instruction itself as immediate and thus has static immutable property. Backward cfi (returns) - Shadow stack (SS) for function returns Extension provides sspush x1/x5, sspop x1/x5 and sschkra instructions. sspush will push on shadow stack while sspop will pop from shadow stack sschkra will succeed only when x1 == x5 is true else it will raise illegal instruction exception. Shadow stacks introduces new virtual memory type and thus new PTE encodings. Existing reserved encoding of R=0,W=1,X=0 is now shadow stack PTE encoding (only if backward cfi is enabled for current mode). New virtual memory type allows CPU to distinguish so that stores coming from sspush or ssamoswap can succeed while regular stores raise access violations. opcodes: zisslpcfi opcodes are carved out of new opcode encodings. These opcodes encodings were reserved until now. A new extension called zimops make these opcodes into "may be operations". zimops stands for unprivileged may be operations (mops) and if implemented default behavior is to mov 0 to rd. zisslpcfi extension changes executable in a way where it should be able to run on riscv cpu which implements cfi extension as well as riscv cpu which doesn't implement cfi extension. As long as zimops is implemented, all such instructions will not fault and simply move 0 to rd. A hart implementing cfi must implement zimops. Any future extension can re-purpose zimops to change behavior and claim them while also not breaking binary/executable compatiblity . zisslpcfi is first such extension to modify zimops behavior. Instructions: zisslpcfi defines following instructions. Backward control flow: sspush x1/x5: Decrement shadow stack pointer and pushes x1 or x5 on shadow stack. sspop x1/x5: Pops from shadow stack into x1 or x5. Increments shadow stack pointer. ssprr: Reads current shadow stack pointer into a destination register. sschckra: Compares x1 with x5. Raises illegal instr exception if x1 != x5. ssamoswap: Atomically swaps value on top of shadow stack. Forward control flow: Forward control flow extends architecture to allow software to set labels (25bits of label) at call/jmp site and check labels at target. Extension gives instructions to set label as part of immediate in instruction itself . Since immediate is limited in terms of bit length, labels are set and checked in ladder fashion of 9, 8 and 8 bits. lpsll, lpsml, lpsul: sets lower (9bit), mid (8bit) and upper (8bit) label values in CSR_LPLR respectively. lpcll, lpcml, lpcul: checks lower (9bit), mid (8bit) and upper (8bit) label values with CSR_LPLR respectively. Check label instructions raise illegal instruction fault when labels mismatch. `lpcll` has dual purpose; it acts as landing pad instruction as well label checking for lower 9 bits. Tests and other bits ******************** For convenience this patch has been tested with followng qemu impl. https://github.com/deepak0414/qemu/tree/scfi_menvcfg_gh_Zisslpcfi-0.1 I've been able to boot linux kernel using this implementation and run very basic simple tests apps. For convenience here is the branch which has implementation. https://github.com/deepak0414/linux-riscv-cfi/tree/Zisslpcfi-0.4_v6.1-rc2 In order to perform unit-tests on qemu-impl, I've been using riscv-test and created unit tests to test implementation. riscv-tests branch URL is below https://github.com/deepak0414/riscv-tests/tree/cfi_tests [1] - https://github.com/riscv/riscv-cfi [2] - https://www.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/catc17-introduction-intel-cet-844137.pdf [3] - https://community.arm.com/arm-community-blogs/b/architectures-and-processors-blog/posts/arm-a-profile-architecture-2022 Deepak Gupta (20): sslp stubs: shadow stack and landing pad stubs riscv: zisslpcfi enumeration riscv: zisslpcfi extension csr and bit definitions riscv: kernel enabling user code for shadow stack and landing pad mmap : Introducing new protection "PROT_SHADOWSTACK" for mmap riscv: Implementing "PROT_SHADOWSTACK" on riscv elf: ELF header parsing in GNU property for cfi state riscv: ELF header parsing in GNU property for riscv zisslpcfi riscv mmu: riscv shadow stack page fault handling riscv mmu: write protect and shadow stack mmu: maybe_mkwrite updated to manufacture shadow stack PTEs riscv mm: manufacture shadow stack pte and is vma shadowstack riscv: illegal instruction handler for cfi violations riscv: audit mode for cfi violations sslp prctl: arch-agnostic prctl for shadow stack and landing pad instr riscv: Implements sslp prctls riscv ucontext: adding shadow stack pointer field in ucontext riscv signal: Save and restore of shadow stack for signal config: adding two new config for control flow integrity riscv: select config for shadow stack and landing pad instr support arch/riscv/Kconfig | 4 + arch/riscv/include/asm/csr.h | 28 ++++ arch/riscv/include/asm/elf.h | 54 ++++++++ arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h | 6 +- arch/riscv/include/asm/mman.h | 19 +++ arch/riscv/include/asm/pgtable.h | 21 ++- arch/riscv/include/asm/processor.h | 26 ++++ arch/riscv/include/asm/thread_info.h | 5 + arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/ucontext.h | 32 ++++- arch/riscv/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 5 + arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c | 1 + arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 + arch/riscv/kernel/entry.S | 40 ++++++ arch/riscv/kernel/process.c | 155 +++++++++++++++++++++ arch/riscv/kernel/signal.c | 45 ++++++ arch/riscv/kernel/sys_riscv.c | 22 +++ arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c | 183 ++++++++++++++++++++++++- arch/riscv/mm/fault.c | 23 +++- arch/riscv/mm/init.c | 2 +- arch/riscv/mm/pageattr.c | 7 + fs/binfmt_elf.c | 5 + include/linux/elf.h | 8 ++ include/linux/mm.h | 23 +++- include/linux/pgtable.h | 4 + include/linux/processor.h | 17 +++ include/uapi/asm-generic/mman-common.h | 6 + include/uapi/linux/elf.h | 6 + include/uapi/linux/prctl.h | 26 ++++ init/Kconfig | 19 +++ kernel/sys.c | 40 ++++++ mm/mmap.c | 4 + 31 files changed, 825 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) create mode 100644 arch/riscv/include/asm/mman.h