lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:42:45 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
	Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	Wolfram Gloger <wmglo@...t.med.uni-muenchen.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/process: Silence KASAN warnings in get_wchan()

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 6:15 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 02:46:30PM +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>> It's absolutely unusable:( https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67368
>> If we add it here, it won't built because of: '__always_inline __read_once_size()'
>>
>> But, I think I have the solution.
>> We could have some blacklist - list of function names which we should be ignored.
>> In kasan_report() we could resolve return address to function name and compare it with name in list.
>> If name in list -> ignore report.
>
> Sounds better. :)

These ought to be rare.  probe_kernel_xyz are hopefully already
covered, which leaves strange accesses to things that are known to be
out of bounds, which ought to be just the memory allocation stuff
(already covered?) and stack walking code (this stuff).

I think that READ_ONCE_NOCHECK is a decent solution that isn't too messy.

--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ