Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Jan 2015 20:47:46 +0100 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86, tls: Interpret an all-zero struct user_desc as "no segment" |
| |
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:27:59AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > The Witcher 2 did something like this to allocate a TLS segment index: > > struct user_desc u_info; > bzero(&u_info, sizeof(u_info)); > u_info.entry_number = (uint32_t)-1; > > syscall(SYS_set_thread_area, &u_info); > > Strictly speaking, this code was never correct. It should have set > read_exec_only and seg_not_present to 1 to indicate that it wanted > to find a free slot without putting anything there, or it should > have put something sensible in the TLS slot if it wanted to allocate > a TLS entry for real. The actual effect of this code was to > allocate a bogus segment that could be used to exploit espfix. > > The set_thread_area hardening patches changed the behavior, causing > set_thread_area to return -EINVAL and crashing the game. > > This changes set_thread_area to interpret this as a request to find > a free slot and to leave it empty, which isn't *quite* what the game > expects but should be close enough to keep it working. In > particular, using the code above to allocate two segments will > allocate the same segment both times. > > According to FrostbittenKing on Github, this fixes The Witcher 2. > > If this somehow still causes problems, we could instead allocate > a limit==0 32-bit data segment, but that seems rather ugly to me. > > Fixes: 41bdc78544b8 x86/tls: Validate TLS entries to protect espfix > Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Shouldn't this also be CC:stable?
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. --
| |