On 28.01.21 09:20, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On 1/28/21 1:57 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 12:35:35PM -0800, Joel Peshkin wrote:
>>
>>> Add support for stack protector for UBOOT, SPL, and TPL
>>> as well as new pytest for stackprotector
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Joel Peshkin <joel.pesh...@broadcom.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.g...@gmx.de>
>>
>> Oddly enough this cases a number of the TPM2 tests to fail on sandbox:
>> https://dev.azure.com/u-boot/u-boot/_build/results?buildId=1706&view=logs&j=50449d1b-398e-53ae-48fa-6bf338edeb51&t=97605dd2-f5a5-5dd7-2118-315ffdc8bcd6&l=755
>>
>>
>
> Thanks Tom for the head-up.
>
> The problem is reproducible locally using 'make tests' with the patch
> applied on top of origin/master.
>
> Best regards
>
> Heinrich
The stack protector has successfully detected stack smashes. See below.
A secondary finding is: panic("foo") without \n is not correctly flushed
to the console on the sandbox.
test_tpm2_init:
Stack smashing detected in function:
00005563faa7c521 relocated from 000000000004d521
u-boot.map
0x000000000004cf44 do_spi
0x000000000004d9e9 print_byte_string
It seems that the output written in the stack-protector test ends up in
the following test which happens to be test_tpm2_init:
static int do_test_stackprot_fail(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag, int argc,
char *const argv[])
{
4d4db: 48 81 ec 98 00 00 00 sub $0x98,%rsp
char a[128];
memset(a, 0xa5, 512);
4d4e2: ba 00 02 00 00 mov $0x200,%edx
4d4e7: be a5 00 00 00 mov $0xa5,%esi
{
4d4ec: 64 48 8b 04 25 28 00 mov %fs:0x28,%rax
4d4f3: 00 00·
4d4f5: 48 89 84 24 88 00 00 mov %rax,0x88(%rsp)
4d4fc: 00·
4d4fd: 31 c0 xor %eax,%eax
memset(a, 0xa5, 512);
4d4ff: 48 8d 7c 24 08 lea 0x8(%rsp),%rdi
4d504: e8 1f 34 0d 00 callq 120928 <memset>
return 0;
}
4d509: 48 8b 84 24 88 00 00 mov 0x88(%rsp),%rax
4d510: 00·
4d511: 64 48 2b 04 25 28 00 sub %fs:0x28,%rax
4d518: 00 00·
4d51a: 74 05 je 4d521
<do_test_stackprot_fail+0x46>
4d51c: e8 68 48 02 00 callq 71d89 <__stack_chk_fail>
>>>4d521: 31 c0 xor %eax,%eax
4d523: 48 81 c4 98 00 00 00 add $0x98,%rsp
4d52a: c3 retq···
TestEfiCapsuleFirmwareFit.test_efi_capsule_fw3
#Stack smashing detected in function:
000055827c21cb58 relocated from 00000000000d8b58
Here we seem to have a real finding.
u-boot.map
0x00000000000d7fae efi_launch_capsules
0x00000000000da1ec set_shift_mask
efi_set_variable_int(L"CapsuleLast", &efi_guid_capsule_report,
d8b10: 4c 8b 04 24 mov (%rsp),%r8
d8b14: 45 31 c9 xor %r9d,%r9d
d8b17: 48 8d 35 42 1c 11 00 lea 0x111c42(%rip),%rsi
# 1ea760 <efi_guid_capsule_report>
d8b1e: b9 16 00 00 00 mov $0x16,%ecx
d8b23: ba 07 00 00 80 mov $0x80000007,%edx
d8b28: 48 8d 3d e7 61 0c 00 lea 0xc61e7(%rip),%rdi
# 19ed16 <__func__.0+0x132e6>
d8b2f: e8 34 ab 00 00 callq e3668 <efi_set_variable_int>
return ret;
d8b34: eb 0a jmp d8b40
<efi_launch_capsules+0xb92>
return EFI_DEVICE_ERROR;
d8b36: 49 bc 07 00 00 00 00 movabs $0x8000000000000007,%r12
d8b3d: 00 00 80·
}
d8b40: 48 8b 84 24 c8 00 00 mov 0xc8(%rsp),%rax
d8b47: 00·
d8b48: 64 48 2b 04 25 28 00 sub %fs:0x28,%rax
d8b4f: 00 00·
d8b51: 74 05 je d8b58
<efi_launch_capsules+0xbaa>
d8b53: e8 31 92 f9 ff callq 71d89 <__stack_chk_fail>
>>>d8b58: 48 81 c4 d8 00 00 00 add $0xd8,%rsp
d8b5f: 4c 89 e0 mov %r12,%rax
d8b62: 5b pop %rbx
d8b63: 5d pop %rbp
d8b64: 41 5c pop %r12
d8b66: 41 5d pop %r13
d8b68: 41 5e pop %r14
d8b6a: 41 5f pop %r15
d8b6c: c3 retq···
Best regards
Heinrich
