linux-kernel - Re: [revert request for commit 9fff2fa] Re: [git pull] signals pile 3

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20121015170600.GD30907@arm.com>
Date:	Mon, 15 Oct 2012 18:06:00 +0100
From:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Daniel Mack <zonque@...il.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [revert request for commit 9fff2fa] Re: [git pull] signals
 pile 3

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 05:27:32PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 05:07:10PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 08:56:11PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 08:24:03PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Russell, could you recall what those had been about?  I'm not sure if that
> > > > had been oopsable that far back (again, oops scenario is userland stack
> > > > page getting swapped out before we get to start_thread(), leading to
> > > > direct read from an absent page in start_thread() by plain ldr, without
> > > > anything in exception table about that insn), but it looks very odd
> > > > regardless of that problem.
> > > 
> > > BTW, arm64 has copied that logics, so it also seems to be unsafe and very
> > > odd - there we definitely have only ELF to cope with.  arm64 folks Cc'd...
> > 
> > Good point. We don't need this on arm64 and probably neither on arm (at
> > least since EABI).
> > 
> > Setting x0 may cause other issues as well. The dynamic loader simply
> > ignores the startup registers but for static binaries the _start code in
> > glibc expects r0 to contain a function pointer to be registered with
> > atexit() in __libc_start_main() or NULL. Since we pass argc in there,
> > for static binaries the rtld_fini argument to __libc_start_main() is
> > neither NULL nor something meaningful.
> 
> The value left there by start_thread() will not reach the userland anyway...

Ah, yes. So not causing any user issues (apart from the possible fault
in the kernel while accessing the user stack).

-- 
Catalin

--
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/