lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Aug]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 00/14] x86: Add support for Clang CFI
From
Date
On 8/23/21 10:20 AM, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 10:16 AM Tom Stellard <tstellar@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 8/23/21 10:13 AM, 'Sami Tolvanen' via Clang Built Linux wrote:
>>> This series adds support for Clang's Control-Flow Integrity (CFI)
>>> checking to x86_64. With CFI, the compiler injects a runtime
>>> check before each indirect function call to ensure the target is
>>> a valid function with the correct static type. This restricts
>>> possible call targets and makes it more difficult for an attacker
>>> to exploit bugs that allow the modification of stored function
>>> pointers. For more details, see:
>>>
>>> https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ControlFlowIntegrity.html
>>>
>>> Version 2 depends on Clang >=14, where we fixed the issue with
>>> referencing static functions from inline assembly. Based on the
>>> feedback for v1, this version also changes the declaration of
>>> functions that are not callable from C to use an opaque type,
>>> which stops the compiler from replacing references to them. This
>>> avoids the need to sprinkle function_nocfi() macros in the kernel
>>> code.
>>
>> How invasive are the changes in clang 14 necessary to make CFI work?
>> Would it be possible to backport them to LLVM 13?
>
> I'm not sure what the LLVM backport policy is, but this specific fix
> was quite simple:
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/rG7ce1c4da7726
>

That looks like something we could backport, I filed a bug to track
the backport: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51588.

Do you have any concerns about backporting it or do you think it's pretty
safe?

-Tom


> Sami
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-08-24 19:29    [W:0.142 / U:0.392 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site