public inbox for devel@edk2.groups.io
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	"Yao, Jiewen" <jiewen.yao@intel.com>
Cc: "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" <edk2-devel@ml01.01.org>,
	"Gao, Liming" <liming.gao@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/DxeCore: base code protection on permission attributes
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:07:34 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <262ebc4d-629c-3437-2146-f4c0e5723f1a@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu86Aq+u1n8tkE6Bw1BOWR6y+qAC2j_UVEA58iURzTBuOQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/26/17 15:00, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 25 February 2017 at 04:04, Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.yao@intel.com> wrote:
>> Hi Ard
>> I agree with you on this enhancement.
>>
>> I prefer to adding the description as comment in the code, so that people
>> can get clear picture when he/she reads the code.
>>
>> //
>> // Instead of assuming that a PE/COFF section of type EFI_IMAGE_SCN_CNT_CODE
>> // can always be mapped read-only, classify a section as a code section only
>> // if it has the executable attribute set and the writable attribute
>> cleared.
>> //
>> // This adheres more closely to the PE/COFF spec, and avoids issues with
>> // Linux OS loaders that consists of a single read/write/execute section.
>> //
>> if ((Section[Index].Characteristics & (EFI_IMAGE_SCN_MEM_WRITE |
>> EFI_IMAGE_SCN_MEM_EXECUTE)) == EFI_IMAGE_SCN_MEM_EXECUTE) {
>>
>> With comment update, reviewed-by: Jiewen.yao@intel.com
>>
> 
> Thanks Jiewen
> 
> Pushed as a2ed40c02bf2

Is it possible that (recent?) Linux EFI stubs (aarch64) don't pass the
above check? I got a report from a colleague:

!!!!!!!!  ProtectUefiImageCommon - CodeSegmentCount is 0  !!!!!!!!
EFI stub: Booting Linux Kernel...
EFI stub: Using DTB from configuration table
EFI stub: Exiting boot services and installing virtual address map...

I tried to reproduce it with "4.5.0-15.el7.aarch64", and with
"4.8.7-300.fc25.aarch64", and I'm not seeing the message with either.

I asked him about the exact kernel version (no answer yet, his workday
hasn't started yet).

Any idea how I could validate the section headers of a (decompressed)
kernel image? I tried "aarch64-linux-gnu-objdump --section-headers", but
it doesn't recognize the image.

Thanks,
Laszlo

>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ard Biesheuvel [mailto:ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org]
>>> Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2017 1:51 AM
>>> To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.yao@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Gao, Liming <liming.gao@intel.com>; Ard Biesheuvel
>>> <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
>>> Subject: [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/DxeCore: base code protection on permission
>>> attributes
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Instead of assuming that a PE/COFF section of type EFI_IMAGE_SCN_CNT_CODE
>>> can always be mapped read-only, classify a section as a code section only
>>> if it has the executable attribute set and the writable attribute cleared.
>>>
>>> This adheres more closely to the PE/COFF spec, and avoids issues with
>>> Linux OS loaders that consists of a single read/write/execute section.
>>>
>>> Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
>>> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>>  MdeModulePkg/Core/Dxe/Misc/MemoryProtection.c | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/Core/Dxe/Misc/MemoryProtection.c
>>> b/MdeModulePkg/Core/Dxe/Misc/MemoryProtection.c
>>> index 1142dcc5a83d..3e037607a6be 100644
>>> --- a/MdeModulePkg/Core/Dxe/Misc/MemoryProtection.c
>>> +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Core/Dxe/Misc/MemoryProtection.c
>>> @@ -533,7 +533,7 @@ ProtectUefiImageCommon (
>>>        Name[7]
>>>        ));
>>>
>>> -    if ((Section[Index].Characteristics & EFI_IMAGE_SCN_CNT_CODE) != 0) {
>>> +    if ((Section[Index].Characteristics & (EFI_IMAGE_SCN_MEM_WRITE |
>>> EFI_IMAGE_SCN_MEM_EXECUTE)) == EFI_IMAGE_SCN_MEM_EXECUTE) {
>>>        DEBUG ((DEBUG_VERBOSE, "  VirtualSize          - 0x%08x\n",
>>> Section[Index].Misc.VirtualSize));
>>>        DEBUG ((DEBUG_VERBOSE, "  VirtualAddress       - 0x%08x\n",
>>> Section[Index].VirtualAddress));
>>>        DEBUG ((DEBUG_VERBOSE, "  SizeOfRawData        - 0x%08x\n",
>>> Section[Index].SizeOfRawData));
>>> --
>>> 2.7.4
> _______________________________________________
> edk2-devel mailing list
> edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-17 12:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-24 17:51 [PATCH] MdeModulePkg/DxeCore: base code protection on permission attributes Ard Biesheuvel
2017-02-25  4:04 ` Yao, Jiewen
2017-02-26 14:00   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-03-17 12:07     ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2017-03-17 12:11       ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-03-17 12:35         ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-03-17 13:23           ` Ard Biesheuvel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-list from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=262ebc4d-629c-3437-2146-f4c0e5723f1a@redhat.com \
    --to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox