| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 13:11:03 -0700 From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> Cc: Marian Marinov <mm@...com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Pondering per-process vsyscall disablement On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 1:05 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote: > On 05/30/2014 01:00 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >> Do the flags go in the ELF loader or in the executable we're running? >> Or both (and, if both, do we and them or or them)? >> >> I think the interpreter makes a little more sense in general: for the >> most part, use of vsyscalls is a property of the runtime environment, >> not of the program being run. But maybe this is naive. >> > > They go into each object which becomes part of the running program, i.e. > executable, dynamic libraries, and dynamic linker. Well, sure, but the kernel is not about to start reading ELF headers in dynamic libraries. So we need to make a decision based on the interpreter and the executable. The conservative approach is to require both to have the flag set *and* to offer a prctl to twiddle the flags. Then userspace loaders can do whatever they want, and distros get to rebuild the world :) --Andy -- 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