[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 07:36:17 +0100
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Matteo Croce <technoboy85@...il.com>,
Sven-Haegar Koch <haegar@...net.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: i686 quirk for AMD Geode
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:15:58PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 11/10/2009 09:52 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> >
> > - last, the probability of having an NX page just after an
> > executable one seems too tight to me to even constitute
> > an attack vector ! BTW, I'm not even certain that all CPUs
> > correctly implement this check !
> >
>
> Do you have *any* *evidence* *whatsoever* for that assertion?!
No, just basic feeling based on implementation cost and difficulty
vs gains as I explained.
> I personally will consider something that doesn't implement proper
> security check to be a potential security hole and will NAK the patch.
Even in the case of the NOPL instruction ? I clearly don't see
the potential security hole !
Willy
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists