linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] retpoline/module: Taint kernel for missing retpoline in module

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:   Sat, 13 Jan 2018 10:20:58 -0800
From:   Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        dwmw@...zon.co.uk, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        jeyu@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] retpoline/module: Taint kernel for missing retpoline in
 module

> > Also what's the point of putting this information into every symbol?
> 
> It makes it easy to check :)

Easier than nm?

Per symbol still doesn't make any sense to me.

> 
> > Once per module is good enough.
> > 
> > We already have similar checks for staging etc.
> 
> Sure, but this is more of a "Hey, your version of GCC is doing something
> different than what you built the kernel with, watch out!" which is much
> more generic and good to know.  A whole taint for one CPU bug type seems
> overkill to me.

I removed the taint in version 2, posted yesterday. It now just prints
the warning and resets the vulnerability reporting in sysfs.

-Andi