linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/5] Add the Kconfig option for the stackprotector feature

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: <1154107582.6416.34.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Date:	Fri, 28 Jul 2006 19:26:22 +0200
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Paweł Sikora <pluto@...k.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/5] Add the Kconfig option for the stackprotector
	feature

On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 19:13 +0200, Paweł Sikora wrote:
> 
> yes, it could.
> 
> gcc supports stack protection at so called tree-level (it means
> it's architecture-independent). i've just tested a simple
> userland-code:

in userland it works, no question about that.
The problem comes when you want to use this userland abi in kernel
space; for x86-64 it could be done by a 20 line gcc patch, on some other
architectures... it's going to be really incredibly hard.

I'd have loved to make this more generic... but the mechanism behind
this technology on the gcc side is very architecture specific.

-
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/