re new grsec features from blog against Stackjacking
Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:59 am
First of all you and the PAX team do great work. Second I'm nowhere near the level of expertise to be able to understand all of it.
Any real world performance impacts of this? Shouldn't be any right?
Do you have any idea of the performance impact of enabling this? Seems extreme. Was this even necessary for real world apps?
Wasn't this implemented a while ago?
Do you or does anyone know the impact of this in a desktop system such as KDE or Gnome? Sounds like it would be a nightmare to enable this on a desktop cause apps are mostly not written with real security in mind but is it even necessary.
Seems useful.
This one seems useful.
Moved thread_info off the kernel stack completely for both i386 and amd64 -- it's now located in the task struct, which is located in its own slab cache.
Any real world performance impacts of this? Shouldn't be any right?
Implemented PAX_RANDKSTACK for amd64 (without requiring MSR access, performance hit is the same as the i386 version since it calls the same function). This is applied per-syscall, making it essentially immune to infoleaks against the stack pointer itself, the same as on the i386 version.
Do you have any idea of the performance impact of enabling this? Seems extreme. Was this even necessary for real world apps?
Implemented additional protection in PAX_USERCOPY by identifying which slab caches required direct reads/writes from the userland accessor functions. Slab cache information is free within the current PAX_USERCOPY framework. We implemented a whitelist-based approach, and rewrote several areas of code to remove the need for direct reads/writes to certain structures so that the associated slab caches can be protected against direct reads/writes to/from userland. The technique allows for individual allocations within the whitelisted caches to be marked in the future, so that certain sensitive structures can be better protected. Of particular note is that task structs are protected under this mechanism.
Wasn't this implemented a while ago?
Implemented active response against kernel exploitation. Attacks by unprivileged users will result in a permanent ban of the user (all processes killed, no new processes allowed) until system reboot. Attacks by root (either by real uid-0 or as fallout from buggy post-exploitation cleanup) or while in interrupt context result in a system panic.
Do you or does anyone know the impact of this in a desktop system such as KDE or Gnome? Sounds like it would be a nightmare to enable this on a desktop cause apps are mostly not written with real security in mind but is it even necessary.
Extended automatic bruteforce deterrence to apply to suid/sgid binaries -- detected PaX terminations or crashes will result in a 15 minute user ban (the amount of time intended to help offset entropy reduction attacks).
Seems useful.
Improved MODHARDEN -- removed the fallback in netdev code to allow auto-loading any module when CAP_SYS_MODULE is present. The PaX Team came up with the beautiful idea, and I implemented a system by which we can control the entire asynchronous procedure of module auto-loading, along with correlating it with the original requester. Through this system, we can ensure (for instance) that mount -t can only cause filesystem modules to be loaded (verified through symbol inspection at load time). This system also has the side-effect of removing unnecessary reports for non-existent modules, as was the case in the previous system (since at request time we couldn't know whether the module existed or not). All these changes allow us to make stronger guarantees about the feature, regardless of any buggy privileged user code that performs certain actions on behalf of unprivileged users through dbus or the like.
This one seems useful.