Conversation

Replying to
I really like #FreeBSD's MAP_GUARD implementation for guard pages. It's used in #bhyve to protect the VM's address space from the host's perspective. MAP_GUARD is essentially PROT_NONE on steroids. It prevents growable segments (ie, MAP_STACK) from expanding into the region.
1
Replying to
On Linux, MAP_STACK is a no-op and secondary stack mappings are just a contiguous, static mapping like other mmap mappings so it doesn't really matter. The main thread stack is a special case and has a properly enforced gap that's not a PROT_NONE region so it can't grow into one.
2
Replying to and
The enforced gap is a special reserved area rather than an actual normal mapping. Secondary stacks are just a mapping made by the libc pthread_create implementation (or the caller, if they provide their own stack) with a guard region. I improved that in my past libc hardening.
1
Replying to and
In my previous Bionic hardening, I added randomly sized guard regions on both ends similar to how I handle large allocations in the hardened allocator along with randomizing the stack pointer within the initial page to a certain extent up to a limit like 2% of available space.
1
Replying to and
Since realloc actually has to be aware of how the guard pages work for the efficient approaches to large allocation shrinking, growth and moving pages to a new location with the mapping already reserved via MREMAP_MAYMOVE|MREMAP_FIXED. Those are just optimized fast paths though.
2
Replying to and
It has to actually allocate a new mapping in the usual way to provide it with guard pages, and then move the non-guard pages to the new inner portion via MREMAP_MAYMOVE|MREMAP_FIXED. It essentially uses it as an optimized memcpy and falls back to memcpy if that system call fails.
1
Replying to and
Those are both just optimizations. There's no harm in disabling both. It's rarely ever possible to do in-place growth anyway, at least on Linux where the mmap heap starts at a high address and grows downwards. MREMAP_MAYMOVE helps a huge amount but it's only for massive realloc.
1
Replying to and
Also worth noting that one of the few forms of misuse this allocator implementation isn't hardened against is a buggy program with realloc races on the same allocation between different threads. I've thought about how to address that but it's quite difficult and would be costly.
1
Show replies