linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] SROP Mitigation: Architecture independent code for signal cookies

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:	Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:17:53 -0500
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Scott Bauer <sbauer@....utah.edu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kernel-hardening\@lists.openwall.com" 
	<kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
	"the arch\/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, wmealing@...hat.com,
	Abhiram Balasubramanian <abhiram@...utah.edu>,
	Scott Bauer <sbauer@...donthack.me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] SROP Mitigation: Architecture independent code for signal cookies

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> writes:

> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Eric W. Biederman
> <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
>>
>> I suspect we want this to be a per-mm attribute rather than a per-thread
>> attribute.
>>
>> Otherwise you are breaking anything that uses a N-M threading model.
>> Which I suspect means that this implementation choice breaks all go
>> programs on linux.
>
> That sounds like a good point, but wouldn't it make more conceptual
> sense to make it part of "struct sighand_struct" instead?
>
> That is also shared for threads.

Good point.  Given this is a signal handling feature
struct sighand_struct is the natural place to put this.

Eric