Messages in this thread |  | | From | Ard Biesheuvel <> | Date | Mon, 1 Nov 2021 00:36:18 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] static_call,x86: Robustify trampoline patching |
| |
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 at 21:45, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 09:21:56PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > That means we can support static calls on arm64 now without breaking > > Clang CFI, and work on a solution for the redundant jumps on a more > > relaxed schedule. > > Yes, arm64 has a 'problem' with having already merged the clang-cfi > stuff :/ > > I'm hoping the x86 solution can be an alternative CFI scheme, I'm > starting to really hate this one. And I'm not at all convinced the > proposed scheme is the best possible scheme given the constraints of > kernel code. AFAICT it's a compromise made in userspace.
Your scheme only works with IBT: the value of %r11 is under the adversary's control so it could just point it at 'foo+0x10' if it wants to call foo indirectly, and circumvent the check. So without IBT (or BTI), I think the check fundamentally belongs in the caller, not in the callee.
|  |