[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4db3947b-741f-c3c4-f1f2-ba6d85de9f1c@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 12:33:17 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/boot: Refuse to build with data relocations
On 05/17/16 12:28, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> I think there is something way more subtle going on here, and it bothers
>> me exactly because it is subtle. It may be that it is OK right now, but
>> there are alarm bells going on all over my brain on this. I'm going to
>> stare at this for a bit and see if I can make sense of it; but if it
>> turns out that what we have is something really problematic it might be
>> better to apply a big hammer and avoid future breakage once and for all.
>
> Sounds good. I would just like to decouple this from the KASLR
> improvements. This fragility hasn't changed as a result of that work,
> but I'd really like to have that series put to bed -- I've spent a lot
> of time already cleaning up it and other areas of the compressed
> kernel code. :)
>
Agreed; this is orthogonal to kASLR.
-hpa
Powered by blists - more mailing lists