[PATCH v8] Add support for stack-protector

[Heinrich Schuchardt]

On 28.01.21 12:00, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> 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.peshkin at broadcom.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk at 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/py/test.py --bd=sandbox -ra --build-dir=build-sandbox -k='not
test_stackprotector'
shows no error for tpm2.

./test/py/test.py --bd=sandbox -ra --build-dir=build-sandbox -k='not
test_stackprotector'
shows the error for tpm2.

I think the test test_stackprotector() is broken. I causes the sandbox
to reset but does not wait until reaches the prompt again, e.g add

    u_boot_console.restart_uboot()

instead of assert(true).

@Joel
Could you, please, submit a corrected patch.

@Takahiro
For test/py/tests/test_efi_capsule/test_capsule_firmware.py I always see
a smash. Could you, please, have a look at efi_launch_capsules().

Best regards

Heinrich

>
> 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
>