linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: Enable full randomization on i386 and X86

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:	Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:53:01 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Hector Marco-Gisbert <hecmargi@....es>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	Ismael Ripoll Ripoll <iripoll@....es>,
	Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Enable full randomization on i386 and X86_32.


* Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Arjan van de Ven
> <arjan@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >> Arjan, or other folks, can you remember why x86_32 disabled mmap
> >> randomization here? There doesn't seem to be a good reason for it that
> >> I see.
> >
> >
> > for unlimited stack it got really messy with threaded apps.
> 
> Seems like it'd only cause problems for really really giant processes?
> (I think it's telling that the other 32-bit archs don't disable ASLR
> in this case...)

IIRC there was some sort of specific breakage with unlimited stack apps - I don't 
remember the exact details.

> > anyway, I don't mind seeing if this will indeed work, with time running out 
> > where 32 bit is going extinct... in a few years we just won't have enough 
> > testing on this kind of change anymore.
> 
> Sounds good. Ingo, can you pull this in and we can try it for -next?

Ok, we can certainly try. If there's breakage with old distros then we might need 
to put this behind a legacy Kconfig switch.

Thanks,

	Ingo