[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20151103160410.34bbebc805c17d2f41150a19@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 16:04:10 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Daniel Cashman <dcashman@...roid.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux@....linux.org.uk,
keescook@...omium.org, mingo@...nel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, corbet@....net,
dzickus@...hat.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, xypron.glpk@....de,
jpoimboe@...hat.com, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com, aarcange@...hat.com, mgorman@...e.de,
tglx@...utronix.de, rientjes@...gle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, salyzyn@...roid.com, jeffv@...gle.com,
nnk@...gle.com, dcashman <dcashman@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: mmap: Add new /proc tunable for mmap_base
ASLR.
On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:10:03 -0800 Daniel Cashman <dcashman@...roid.com> wrote:
> ASLR currently only uses 8 bits to generate the random offset for the
> mmap base address on 32 bit architectures. This value was chosen to
> prevent a poorly chosen value from dividing the address space in such
> a way as to prevent large allocations. This may not be an issue on all
> platforms. Allow the specification of a minimum number of bits so that
> platforms desiring greater ASLR protection may determine where to place
> the trade-off.
Can we please include a very good description of the motivation for this
change? What is inadequate about the current code, what value does the
enhancement have to our users, what real-world problems are being solved,
etc.
Because all we have at present is "greater ASLR protection", which doesn't
really tell anyone anything.
--
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