linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kernel: make /proc/kallsyms mode 400 to reduce ease of attacking

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <871v6xt3l1.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date:	Sun, 07 Nov 2010 19:02:02 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Marcus Meissner <meissner@...e.de>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jason.wessel@...driver.com, fweisbec@...il.com, tj@...nel.org,
	mort@....com, akpm@...l.org, security@...nel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: make /proc/kallsyms mode 400 to reduce ease of attacking

Marcus Meissner <meissner@...e.de> writes:
>
> I also briefly thought about kernel ASLR, but my knowledge of the kernel
> loading is too limited whether this is even possible or at all useful.

Kernel ASLR sounds like a good idea, although there are some traps.

On 32bit the available range is not too great, only a few hundred MB
max. Probably less on a larger systems, there will conflicts with a
large mem_map.  On 64bit x86 it's nearly 2GB and somewhat easier
(although a large mem_map may still be a problem)

You still want to not stray too much from a 2MB alignment
to make sure most of the main kernel is handled by a single 2MB TLB
entry. 

It would not be too hard to do today using kexec and loading the kernel
twice.  Right now the kexec command doesn't allow specifying
the address, but the kernel interface supports it, so it could
be just implemented in the user tool.

Doing it with a single boot sequence would be a bit more work.
Right now the relocation entries are not put into the bzImage
and that would be needed.

That would not cover modules, but it shouldn't be too difficult
to do it for those either.

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/