linux-hardening - Re: __fortify

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]

Message-ID: <1c79d692-bd2c-4125-8a47-7593b3229379@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 10:09:45 -0700
From: Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@...cinc.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
CC: <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: __fortify_panic() question

On 5/29/2024 9:55 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 07:36:25AM -0700, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>> 'make W=1 C=1' on x86 gives the warning:
>> arch/x86/boot/compressed/misc.c:535:6: warning: symbol '__fortify_panic' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> Hm, I can't reproduce this currently (but yes, it looks like arm vs x86
> is mismatched). What tree is this?

e0cce98fe279 (linus/master, linux-master) Merge tag 'tpmdd-next-6.10-rc2' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jarkko/linux-tpmdd

> 
>> Looking at this I see for ARM there is a prototype for __fortify_panic() in
>> arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.h
>> And there is a matching implementation in arch/arm/boot/compressed/misc.c
>>
>> But for x86 there is only the implementation in
>> arch/x86/boot/compressed/misc.c
>> There is not a prototype in arch/x86/boot/compressed/misc.h.
>>
>> The easy fix for this would be to add a prototype to
>> arch/x86/boot/compressed/misc.h.
> 
> Yeah, I think this is the right solution.

You want to do this, or should I?

> 
>> But it seems strange to me to add a prototype to a header file that is only 
>> for the benefit of the callee and is not the prototype/header used by the 
>> caller, in this case the one in include/linux/fortify-string.h
> 
> The stuff in boot/ doesn't tend to include fortify-string.h (since it's
> sort of "outside" the kernel), hence the need for additional prototypes.
> 

thanks for the info!

/jeff