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:   Thu, 4 Jan 2018 01:31:43 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
cc:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...ux-foundation.org>,
        dwmw@...zon.co.uk, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Avoid speculative indirect calls in kernel

On Thu, 4 Jan 2018, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2018 16:15:01 -0800
> Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> 
> > > It should be a CPU_BUG bit as we have for the other mess. And that can be
> > > used for patching.  
> > 
> > It has to be done at compile time because it requires a compiler option.
> > 
> > Most of the indirect calls are in C code.
> > 
> > So it cannot just patched in, only partially out.
> 
> You can replace the pushl ; jmp  with an alternatives section (although
> there might be a lot of them). Even if gcc isn't smart enough to do that
> perl is.

So you say, that we finally need a perl interpreter in the kernel to do
alternative patching?

Thanks,

	tglx

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ