linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] livepatch: Add a new function to verify the address and name match for extra module

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]

Date:	Mon, 13 Apr 2015 17:58:49 -0500
From:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:	Minfei Huang <minfei.huang@...mail.com>
Cc:	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>, sjenning@...hat.com,
	jkosina@...e.cz, vojtech@...e.cz, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] livepatch: Add a new function to verify the address
 and name match for extra module

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 06:37:10PM +0800, Minfei Huang wrote:
> For my patches, I think it is used by the persion which will compose the
> patch individually, not for the manufactor. 
> 
> Yes, Verifying extra function address is more useless in general, due to
> the changable address on different system.
> 
> IMO, we shall do our best to make livepatch more robust.

IIUC, to use this, you'd have to load the module first, manually look up
the module function's address, and _then_ build the patch for the
running system.  And the resulting patch wouldn't work on other systems.

Do you have concrete plans to use it this way?

Just trying to understand if this is needed for a real world usage
scenario.

-- 
Josh
--
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/