Instead of duplicating the same code for each architecture, move
the CFI type hash variables for BPF function types and related
helper functions to generic CFI code, and allow architectures to
override the function definitions if needed.
Signed-off-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250801001004.1859976-7-samitolvanen@google.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
While WAIT_FOR_ENDBR is specified to be a full speculation stop; it
has been shown that some implementations are 'leaky' to such an extend
that speculation can escape even the FineIBT preamble.
To deal with this, add additional hardening to the FineIBT preamble.
Notably, using a new LLVM feature:
e223485c9b
which encodes the number of arguments in the kCFI preamble's register.
Using this register<->arity mapping, have the FineIBT preamble CALL
into a stub clobbering the relevant argument registers in the
speculative case.
Scott sayeth thusly:
Microarchitectural attacks such as Branch History Injection (BHI) and
Intra-mode Branch Target Injection (IMBTI) [1] can cause an indirect
call to mispredict to an adversary-influenced target within the same
hardware domain (e.g., within the kernel). Instructions at the
mispredicted target may execute speculatively and potentially expose
kernel data (e.g., to a user-mode adversary) through a
microarchitectural covert channel such as CPU cache state.
CET-IBT [2] is a coarse-grained control-flow integrity (CFI) ISA
extension that enforces that each indirect call (or indirect jump)
must land on an ENDBR (end branch) instruction, even speculatively*.
FineIBT is a software technique that refines CET-IBT by associating
each function type with a 32-bit hash and enforcing (at the callee)
that the hash of the caller's function pointer type matches the hash
of the callee's function type. However, recent research [3] has
demonstrated that the conditional branch that enforces FineIBT's hash
check can be coerced to mispredict, potentially allowing an adversary
to speculatively bypass the hash check:
__cfi_foo:
ENDBR64
SUB R10d, 0x01234567
JZ foo # Even if the hash check fails and ZF=0, this branch could still mispredict as taken
UD2
foo:
...
The techniques demonstrated in [3] require the attacker to be able to
control the contents of at least one live register at the mispredicted
target. Therefore, this patch set introduces a sequence of CMOV
instructions at each indirect-callable target that poisons every live
register with data that the attacker cannot control whenever the
FineIBT hash check fails, thus mitigating any potential attack.
The security provided by this scheme has been discussed in detail on
an earlier thread [4].
[1] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/software-security-guidance/technical-documentation/branch-history-injection.html
[2] Intel Software Developer's Manual, Volume 1, Chapter 18
[3] https://www.vusec.net/projects/native-bhi/
[4] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240927194925.707462984@infradead.org/
*There are some caveats for certain processors, see [1] for more info
Suggested-by: Scott Constable <scott.d.constable@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250224124200.820402212@infradead.org
Add an array of code thunks, to be called from the FineIBT preamble,
clobbering the first 'n' argument registers for speculative execution.
Notably the 0th entry will clobber no argument registers and will never
be used, it exists so the array can be naturally indexed, while the 7th
entry will clobber all the 6 argument registers and also RSP in order to
mess up stack based arguments.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250224124200.717378681@infradead.org
Sami reminded me that FineIBT failure does not hook into the regular
CFI failure case, and as such CFI_PERMISSIVE does not work.
Reported-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250214092619.GB21726@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net
Since FineIBT performs checking at the destination, it is weaker against
attacks that can construct arbitrary executable memory contents. As such,
some system builders want to run with FineIBT disabled by default. Allow
the "cfi=kcfi" boot param mode to be selectable through Kconfig via the
newly introduced CONFIG_CFI_AUTO_DEFAULT.
Reviewed-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240501000218.work.998-kees@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Add a CFI_NOSEAL() helper to mark functions that need to retain their
CFI information, despite not otherwise leaking their address.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231215092707.669401084@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
BPF struct_ops uses __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline() to write
trampolines for indirect function calls. These tramplines much have
matching CFI.
In order to obtain the correct CFI hash for the various methods, add a
matching structure that contains stub functions, the compiler will
generate correct CFI which we can pilfer for the trampolines.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231215092707.566977112@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Where the main BPF program is expected to match bpf_func_t,
sub-programs are expected to match bpf_callback_t.
This fixes things like:
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bloom_filter_bench.c:
bpf_for_each_map_elem(&array_map, bloom_callback, &data, 0);
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231215092707.451956710@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
The current BPF call convention is __nocfi, except when it calls !JIT things,
then it calls regular C functions.
It so happens that with FineIBT the __nocfi and C calling conventions are
incompatible. Specifically __nocfi will call at func+0, while FineIBT will have
endbr-poison there, which is not a valid indirect target. Causing #CP.
Notably this only triggers on IBT enabled hardware, which is probably why this
hasn't been reported (also, most people will have JIT on anyway).
Implement proper CFI prologues for the BPF JIT codegen and drop __nocfi for
x86.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231215092707.345270396@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Normal include order is that linux/foo.h should include asm/foo.h, CFI has it
the wrong way around.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231215092707.231038174@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
