x86/uaccess: Use __uaccess_begin_nospec() and uaccess_try_nospec
BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1775137 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 (backported from commit 304ec1b0) [juergh: - Converted additional copy_from_user functions to use __uaccess_begin_nospec(). - Don't use __uaccess_begin_nospec() in __copy_to_user_ll() in arch/x86/lib/usercopy_32.c. - Adjusted context.] Signed-off-by: Juerg Haefliger <juergh@canonical.com> Acked-by: Kleber Souza <kleber.souza@canonical.com> Acked-by: Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@canonical.com> Signed-off-by: Khalid Elmously <khalid.elmously@canonical.com>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment