linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] sigaltstack: implement SS

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:	Fri, 4 Mar 2016 14:22:24 -0800
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Stas Sergeev <stsp@...t.ru>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@....de>,
	Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
	"Amanieu d'Antras" <amanieu@...il.com>,
	Paul Moore <pmoore@...hat.com>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stas Sergeev <stsp@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sigaltstack: implement SS_AUTODISARM flag

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Stas Sergeev <stsp@...t.ru> wrote:
> This patch implements the SS_AUTODISARM flag that can be ORed with
> SS_ONSTACK when forming ss_flags.
> When this flag is set, sigaltstack will be disabled when entering
> the signal handler; more precisely, after saving sas to uc_stack.
> When leaving the signal handler, the sigaltstack is restored by
> uc_stack.
> When this flag is used, it is safe to switch from sighandler with
> swapcontext(). Without this flag, the subsequent signal will corrupt
> the state of the switched-away sighandler.
>

This looks reasonable to me with one exception: how does a user
program detect the presence of this feature?  Anyone else have any
thoughts?