|
@@ -1,4 +1,6 @@
|
|
|
-# Kernel Self-Protection
|
|
|
+======================
|
|
|
+Kernel Self-Protection
|
|
|
+======================
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kernel self-protection is the design and implementation of systems and
|
|
|
structures within the Linux kernel to protect against security flaws in
|
|
@@ -26,7 +28,8 @@ mentioning them, since these aspects need to be explored, dealt with,
|
|
|
and/or accepted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-## Attack Surface Reduction
|
|
|
+Attack Surface Reduction
|
|
|
+========================
|
|
|
|
|
|
The most fundamental defense against security exploits is to reduce the
|
|
|
areas of the kernel that can be used to redirect execution. This ranges
|
|
@@ -34,13 +37,15 @@ from limiting the exposed APIs available to userspace, making in-kernel
|
|
|
APIs hard to use incorrectly, minimizing the areas of writable kernel
|
|
|
memory, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Strict kernel memory permissions
|
|
|
+Strict kernel memory permissions
|
|
|
+--------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
When all of kernel memory is writable, it becomes trivial for attacks
|
|
|
to redirect execution flow. To reduce the availability of these targets
|
|
|
the kernel needs to protect its memory with a tight set of permissions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-#### Executable code and read-only data must not be writable
|
|
|
+Executable code and read-only data must not be writable
|
|
|
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
Any areas of the kernel with executable memory must not be writable.
|
|
|
While this obviously includes the kernel text itself, we must consider
|
|
@@ -51,18 +56,19 @@ kernel, they are implemented in a way where the memory is temporarily
|
|
|
made writable during the update, and then returned to the original
|
|
|
permissions.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
-In support of this are CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX and
|
|
|
-CONFIG_STRICT_MODULE_RWX, which seek to make sure that code is not
|
|
|
+In support of this are ``CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX`` and
|
|
|
+``CONFIG_STRICT_MODULE_RWX``, which seek to make sure that code is not
|
|
|
writable, data is not executable, and read-only data is neither writable
|
|
|
nor executable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most architectures have these options on by default and not user selectable.
|
|
|
For some architectures like arm that wish to have these be selectable,
|
|
|
the architecture Kconfig can select ARCH_OPTIONAL_KERNEL_RWX to enable
|
|
|
-a Kconfig prompt. CONFIG_ARCH_OPTIONAL_KERNEL_RWX_DEFAULT determines
|
|
|
+a Kconfig prompt. ``CONFIG_ARCH_OPTIONAL_KERNEL_RWX_DEFAULT`` determines
|
|
|
the default setting when ARCH_OPTIONAL_KERNEL_RWX is enabled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-#### Function pointers and sensitive variables must not be writable
|
|
|
+Function pointers and sensitive variables must not be writable
|
|
|
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vast areas of kernel memory contain function pointers that are looked
|
|
|
up by the kernel and used to continue execution (e.g. descriptor/vector
|
|
@@ -74,8 +80,8 @@ so that they live in the .rodata section instead of the .data section
|
|
|
of the kernel, gaining the protection of the kernel's strict memory
|
|
|
permissions as described above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-For variables that are initialized once at __init time, these can
|
|
|
-be marked with the (new and under development) __ro_after_init
|
|
|
+For variables that are initialized once at ``__init`` time, these can
|
|
|
+be marked with the (new and under development) ``__ro_after_init``
|
|
|
attribute.
|
|
|
|
|
|
What remains are variables that are updated rarely (e.g. GDT). These
|
|
@@ -85,7 +91,8 @@ of their lifetime read-only. (For example, when being updated, only the
|
|
|
CPU thread performing the update would be given uninterruptible write
|
|
|
access to the memory.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
-#### Segregation of kernel memory from userspace memory
|
|
|
+Segregation of kernel memory from userspace memory
|
|
|
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
The kernel must never execute userspace memory. The kernel must also never
|
|
|
access userspace memory without explicit expectation to do so. These
|
|
@@ -95,10 +102,11 @@ By blocking userspace memory in this way, execution and data parsing
|
|
|
cannot be passed to trivially-controlled userspace memory, forcing
|
|
|
attacks to operate entirely in kernel memory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Reduced access to syscalls
|
|
|
+Reduced access to syscalls
|
|
|
+--------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
One trivial way to eliminate many syscalls for 64-bit systems is building
|
|
|
-without CONFIG_COMPAT. However, this is rarely a feasible scenario.
|
|
|
+without ``CONFIG_COMPAT``. However, this is rarely a feasible scenario.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The "seccomp" system provides an opt-in feature made available to
|
|
|
userspace, which provides a way to reduce the number of kernel entry
|
|
@@ -112,7 +120,8 @@ to trusted processes. This would keep the scope of kernel entry points
|
|
|
restricted to the more regular set of normally available to unprivileged
|
|
|
userspace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Restricting access to kernel modules
|
|
|
+Restricting access to kernel modules
|
|
|
+------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
The kernel should never allow an unprivileged user the ability to
|
|
|
load specific kernel modules, since that would provide a facility to
|
|
@@ -127,11 +136,12 @@ for debate in some scenarios.)
|
|
|
To protect against even privileged users, systems may need to either
|
|
|
disable module loading entirely (e.g. monolithic kernel builds or
|
|
|
modules_disabled sysctl), or provide signed modules (e.g.
|
|
|
-CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE, or dm-crypt with LoadPin), to keep from having
|
|
|
+``CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE``, or dm-crypt with LoadPin), to keep from having
|
|
|
root load arbitrary kernel code via the module loader interface.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-## Memory integrity
|
|
|
+Memory integrity
|
|
|
+================
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are many memory structures in the kernel that are regularly abused
|
|
|
to gain execution control during an attack, By far the most commonly
|
|
@@ -139,16 +149,18 @@ understood is that of the stack buffer overflow in which the return
|
|
|
address stored on the stack is overwritten. Many other examples of this
|
|
|
kind of attack exist, and protections exist to defend against them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Stack buffer overflow
|
|
|
+Stack buffer overflow
|
|
|
+---------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
The classic stack buffer overflow involves writing past the expected end
|
|
|
of a variable stored on the stack, ultimately writing a controlled value
|
|
|
to the stack frame's stored return address. The most widely used defense
|
|
|
is the presence of a stack canary between the stack variables and the
|
|
|
-return address (CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR), which is verified just before
|
|
|
+return address (``CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR``), which is verified just before
|
|
|
the function returns. Other defenses include things like shadow stacks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Stack depth overflow
|
|
|
+Stack depth overflow
|
|
|
+--------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
A less well understood attack is using a bug that triggers the
|
|
|
kernel to consume stack memory with deep function calls or large stack
|
|
@@ -158,27 +170,31 @@ important changes need to be made for better protections: moving the
|
|
|
sensitive thread_info structure elsewhere, and adding a faulting memory
|
|
|
hole at the bottom of the stack to catch these overflows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Heap memory integrity
|
|
|
+Heap memory integrity
|
|
|
+---------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
The structures used to track heap free lists can be sanity-checked during
|
|
|
allocation and freeing to make sure they aren't being used to manipulate
|
|
|
other memory areas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Counter integrity
|
|
|
+Counter integrity
|
|
|
+-----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
Many places in the kernel use atomic counters to track object references
|
|
|
or perform similar lifetime management. When these counters can be made
|
|
|
to wrap (over or under) this traditionally exposes a use-after-free
|
|
|
flaw. By trapping atomic wrapping, this class of bug vanishes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Size calculation overflow detection
|
|
|
+Size calculation overflow detection
|
|
|
+-----------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
Similar to counter overflow, integer overflows (usually size calculations)
|
|
|
need to be detected at runtime to kill this class of bug, which
|
|
|
traditionally leads to being able to write past the end of kernel buffers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-## Statistical defenses
|
|
|
+Probabilistic defenses
|
|
|
+======================
|
|
|
|
|
|
While many protections can be considered deterministic (e.g. read-only
|
|
|
memory cannot be written to), some protections provide only statistical
|
|
@@ -186,7 +202,8 @@ defense, in that an attack must gather enough information about a
|
|
|
running system to overcome the defense. While not perfect, these do
|
|
|
provide meaningful defenses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Canaries, blinding, and other secrets
|
|
|
+Canaries, blinding, and other secrets
|
|
|
+-------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
It should be noted that things like the stack canary discussed earlier
|
|
|
are technically statistical defenses, since they rely on a secret value,
|
|
@@ -201,7 +218,8 @@ It is critical that the secret values used must be separate (e.g.
|
|
|
different canary per stack) and high entropy (e.g. is the RNG actually
|
|
|
working?) in order to maximize their success.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Kernel Address Space Layout Randomization (KASLR)
|
|
|
+Kernel Address Space Layout Randomization (KASLR)
|
|
|
+-------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since the location of kernel memory is almost always instrumental in
|
|
|
mounting a successful attack, making the location non-deterministic
|
|
@@ -209,22 +227,25 @@ raises the difficulty of an exploit. (Note that this in turn makes
|
|
|
the value of information exposures higher, since they may be used to
|
|
|
discover desired memory locations.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
-#### Text and module base
|
|
|
+Text and module base
|
|
|
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
By relocating the physical and virtual base address of the kernel at
|
|
|
-boot-time (CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE), attacks needing kernel code will be
|
|
|
+boot-time (``CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE``), attacks needing kernel code will be
|
|
|
frustrated. Additionally, offsetting the module loading base address
|
|
|
means that even systems that load the same set of modules in the same
|
|
|
order every boot will not share a common base address with the rest of
|
|
|
the kernel text.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-#### Stack base
|
|
|
+Stack base
|
|
|
+~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the base address of the kernel stack is not the same between processes,
|
|
|
or even not the same between syscalls, targets on or beyond the stack
|
|
|
become more difficult to locate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-#### Dynamic memory base
|
|
|
+Dynamic memory base
|
|
|
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
Much of the kernel's dynamic memory (e.g. kmalloc, vmalloc, etc) ends up
|
|
|
being relatively deterministic in layout due to the order of early-boot
|
|
@@ -232,7 +253,8 @@ initializations. If the base address of these areas is not the same
|
|
|
between boots, targeting them is frustrated, requiring an information
|
|
|
exposure specific to the region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-#### Structure layout
|
|
|
+Structure layout
|
|
|
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
By performing a per-build randomization of the layout of sensitive
|
|
|
structures, attacks must either be tuned to known kernel builds or expose
|
|
@@ -240,26 +262,30 @@ enough kernel memory to determine structure layouts before manipulating
|
|
|
them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-## Preventing Information Exposures
|
|
|
+Preventing Information Exposures
|
|
|
+================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since the locations of sensitive structures are the primary target for
|
|
|
attacks, it is important to defend against exposure of both kernel memory
|
|
|
addresses and kernel memory contents (since they may contain kernel
|
|
|
addresses or other sensitive things like canary values).
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Unique identifiers
|
|
|
+Unique identifiers
|
|
|
+------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kernel memory addresses must never be used as identifiers exposed to
|
|
|
userspace. Instead, use an atomic counter, an idr, or similar unique
|
|
|
identifier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Memory initialization
|
|
|
+Memory initialization
|
|
|
+---------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
Memory copied to userspace must always be fully initialized. If not
|
|
|
explicitly memset(), this will require changes to the compiler to make
|
|
|
sure structure holes are cleared.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Memory poisoning
|
|
|
+Memory poisoning
|
|
|
+----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
When releasing memory, it is best to poison the contents (clear stack on
|
|
|
syscall return, wipe heap memory on a free), to avoid reuse attacks that
|
|
@@ -267,9 +293,10 @@ rely on the old contents of memory. This frustrates many uninitialized
|
|
|
variable attacks, stack content exposures, heap content exposures, and
|
|
|
use-after-free attacks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-### Destination tracking
|
|
|
+Destination tracking
|
|
|
+--------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
To help kill classes of bugs that result in kernel addresses being
|
|
|
written to userspace, the destination of writes needs to be tracked. If
|
|
|
-the buffer is destined for userspace (e.g. seq_file backed /proc files),
|
|
|
+the buffer is destined for userspace (e.g. seq_file backed ``/proc`` files),
|
|
|
it should automatically censor sensitive values.
|