linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kbuild: Abort build on bad stack protector flag

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLJt3P0-VYqn6K3-1mpTS4n3JRwMzkJwR3+x4Azqk3eUw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 9 Jul 2016 09:59:16 -0700
From:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: Abort build on bad stack protector flag

On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 5:03 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>
>> Before, the stack protector flag was sanity checked before .config had
>> been reprocessed. This meant the build couldn't be aborted early, and
>> only a warning could be emitted followed later by the compiler blowing
>> up with an unknown flag. This has caused a lot of confusion over time,
>> so this splits the flag selection from sanity checking and performs the
>> sanity checking after the make has been restarted from a reprocessed
>> .config, so builds can be aborted as early as possible now.
>>
>> Additionally moves the x86-specific sanity check to the same location,
>> since it suffered from the same warn-then-wait-for-compiler-failure
>> problem.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>> ---
>>  Makefile          | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>>  arch/x86/Makefile |  8 -------
>>  2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> What's the status of this patch? I can merge it if Michal acks the main Makefile
> bits.

There's been no feedback yet, but I'd really like to see it landed: it
removes a lot of ambiguity for this option (and creates a place for
future similar options).

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Chrome OS & Brillo Security