x86/uaccess: Use __uaccess_begin_nospec() and uaccess_try_nospec
BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1811080 commit 304ec1b0 upstream. Quoting Linus: I do think that it would be a good idea to very expressly document the fact that it's not that the user access itself is unsafe. I do agree that things like "get_user()" want to be protected, but not because of any direct bugs or problems with get_user() and friends, but simply because get_user() is an excellent source of a pointer that is obviously controlled from a potentially attacking user space. So it's a prime candidate for then finding _subsequent_ accesses that can then be used to perturb the cache. __uaccess_begin_nospec() covers __get_user() and copy_from_iter() where the limit check is far away from the user pointer de-reference. In those cases a barrier_nospec() prevents speculation with a potential pointer to privileged memory. uaccess_try_nospec covers get_user_try. Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Suggested-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Cc: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Cc: alan@linux.intel.com Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/151727416953.33451.10508284228526170604.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com [bwh: Backported to 4.4: - Convert several more functions to use __uaccess_begin_nospec(), that are just wrappers in mainline - Adjust context] Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> [juergh: Converted additional functions to use __uaccess_begin_nospec(), that were missed in the original backport.] Signed-off-by: Juerg Haefliger <juergh@canonical.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@canonical.com>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment