Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userCamouflage: Hardware-assisted CFI for the ARM Linux kernel
191
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Hans Liljestrand
Publication date
2019
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Software control flow integrity (CFI) solutions have been applied to the Linux kernel for memory protection. Due to performance costs, deployed software CFI solutions are coarse grained. In this work, we demonstrate a precise hardware-assisted kernel CFI running on widely-used off-the-shelf processors. Specifically, we use the ARMv8.3 pointer authentication (PAuth) extension and present a design that uses it to achieve strong security guarantees with minimal performance penalties. Furthermore, we show how deployment of such security primitives in the kernel can significantly differ from their user space application.
rate research
Read More
The security of billions of devices worldwide depends on the security and robustness of the mainline Linux kernel. However, the increasing number of kernel-specific vulnerabilities, especially memory safety vulnerabilities, shows that the kernel is a popular and practically exploitable target. Two major causes of memory safety vulnerabilities are reference counter overflows (temporal memory errors) and lack of pointer bounds checking (spatial memory errors). To succeed in practice, security mechanisms for critical systems like the Linux kernel must also consider performance and deployability as critical design objectives. We present and systematically analyze two such mechanisms for improving memory safety in the Linux kernel: (a) an overflow-resistant reference counter data structure designed to accommodate typical reference counter usage in kernel source code, and (b) runtime pointer bounds checking using Intel MPX in the kernel.
We introduce a form of steganography in the domain of machine learning which we call training set camouflage. Imagine Alice has a training set on an illicit machine learning classification task. Alice wants Bob (a machine learning system) to learn the task. However, sending either the training set or the trained model to Bob can raise suspicion if the communication is monitored. Training set camouflage allows Alice to compute a second training set on a completely different -- and seemingly benign -- classification task. By construction, sending the second training set will not raise suspicion. When Bob applies his standard (public) learning algorithm to the second training set, he approximately recovers the classifier on the original task. Training set camouflage is a novel form of steganography in machine learning. We formulate training set camouflage as a combinatorial bilevel optimization problem and propose solvers based on nonlinear programming and local search. Experiments on real classification tasks demonstrate the feasibility of such camouflage.
Control-flow hijacking attacks are used to perform malicious com-putations. Current solutions for assessing the attack surface afteracontrol flow integrity(CFI) policy was applied can measure onlyindirect transfer averages in the best case without providing anyinsights w.r.t. the absolute calltarget reduction per callsite, and gad-get availability. Further, tool comparison is underdeveloped or notpossible at all. CFI has proven to be one of the most promising pro-tections against control flow hijacking attacks, thus many effortshave been made to improve CFI in various ways. However, there isa lack of systematic assessment of existing CFI protections. In this paper, we presentLLVM-CFI, a static source code analy-sis framework for analyzing state-of-the-art static CFI protectionsbased on the Clang/LLVM compiler framework.LLVM-CFIworksby precisely modeling a CFI policy and then evaluating it within aunified approach.LLVM-CFIhelps determine the level of securityoffered by different CFI protections, after the CFI protections weredeployed, thus providing an important step towards exploit cre-ation/prevention and stronger defenses. We have usedLLVM-CFIto assess eight state-of-the-art static CFI defenses on real-worldprograms such as Google Chrome and Apache Httpd.LLVM-CFIprovides a precise analysis of the residual attack surfaces, andaccordingly ranks CFI policies against each other.LLVM-CFIalsosuccessfully paves the way towards construction of COOP-like codereuse attacks and elimination of the remaining attack surface bydisclosing protected calltargets under eight restrictive CFI policies.
Widespread use of memory unsafe programming languages (e.g., C and C++) leaves many systems vulnerable to memory corruption attacks. A variety of defenses have been proposed to mitigate attacks that exploit memory errors to hijack the control flow of the code at run-time, e.g., (fine-grained) randomization or Control Flow Integrity. However, recent work on data-oriented programming (DOP) demonstrated highly expressive (Turing-complete) attacks, even in the presence of these state-of-the-art defenses. Although multiple real-world DOP attacks have been demonstrated, no efficient defenses are yet available. We propose run-time scope enforcement (RSE), a novel approach designed to efficiently mitigate all currently known DOP attacks by enforcing compile-time memory safety constraints (e.g., variable visibility rules) at run-time. We present HardScope, a proof-of-concept implementation of hardware-assisted RSE for the new RISC-V open instruction set architecture. We discuss our systematic empirical evaluation of HardScope which demonstrates that it can mitigate all currently known DOP attacks, and has a real-world performance overhead of 3.2% in embedded benchmarks.
LockDoc is an approach to extract locking rules for kernel data structures from a dynamic execution trace recorded while the system is under a benchmark load. These locking rules can e.g. be used to locate synchronization bugs. For high rule precision and thorough bug finding, the approach heavily depends on the choice of benchmarks: They must trigger the execution of as much code as possible in the kernel subsystem relevant for the targeted data structures. However, existing test suites such as those provided by the Linux Test Project (LTP) only achieve -- in the case of LTP -- about 35 percent basic-block coverage for the VFS subsystem, which is the relevant subsystem when extracting locking rules for filesystem-related data structures. In this article, we discuss how to complement the LTP suites to improve the code coverage for our LockDoc scenario. We repurpose syzkaller -- a coverage-guided fuzzer with the goal to validate the robustness of kernel APIs -- to 1) not aim for kernel crashes, and to 2) maximize code coverage for a specific kernel subsystem. Thereby, we generate new benchmark programs that can be run in addition to the LTP, and increase VFS basic-block coverage by 26.1 percent.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
