On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 03:05:48PM +0000, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 09.05.23 18:56, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > +/**
> > + * vmalloc_exec - allocate virtually contiguous, executable memory
> > + * @size: allocation size
> > + *
> > + * Kernel-internal function to allocate enough pages to cover @size
> > + * the page level allocator and map them into contiguous and
> > + * executable kernel virtual space.
> > + *
> > + * For tight control over page level allocator and protection flags
> > + * use __vmalloc() instead.
> > + *
> > + * Return: pointer to the allocated memory or %NULL on error
> > + */
> > +void *vmalloc_exec(unsigned long size, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> > +{
> > + return __vmalloc_node_range(size, 1, VMALLOC_START, VMALLOC_END,
> > + gfp_mask, PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC, VM_FLUSH_RESET_PERMS,
> > + NUMA_NO_NODE, __builtin_return_address(0));
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vmalloc_exec);
>
> Uh W+X memory reagions.
> The 90s called, they want their shellcode back.
Just to clarify: the kernel must never create W+X memory regions. So,
no, do not reintroduce vmalloc_exec().
Dynamic code areas need to be constructed in a non-executable memory,
then switched to read-only and verified to still be what was expected,
and only then made executable.
--
Kees Cook
