linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] usercopy fixes for v4.8-rc6-part2

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: <CAGXu5j+710yM8Ns+bWCae22LcSNiL=d5CqYX47vUBA93SUHaLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Sep 2016 14:48:46 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vinson Lee <vlee@...edesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] usercopy fixes for v4.8-rc6-part2

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> - move page-spanning check behind a CONFIG since it's triggering false positives
>>
>> Hmm. I pulled this, but looking at it I realized that
>>
>> +       depends on !COMPILE_TEST
>>
>> doesn't make any real sense to me.
>>
>> All it does is make sure that "make allmodconfig" doesn't actually
>> test that the PAGESPAN code compiles.
>>
>> It's not like that is a big cost for allmodconfig builds, but it does
>> mean that it gets less coverage.
>>
>> And it really makes no sense to me. We *don't* want to run with that
>> option enabled normally.
>>
>> I think what you actually meant was something like
>>
>> +       depends on EXPERT
>>
>> which means that it does *not* get enabled in normal user builds.
>>
>> Hmm?
>
> I guess that's true -- I was trying to think of a way to make sure it
> didn't get tested by 0-day syscall fuzzer on a randconfig, since I
> didn't want the noise. But now that I double-check this, yeah, it
> looks like randconfig doesn't set COMPILE_TEST. Hmpf.
>
> I will send another patch to flip this to EXPERT, and if 0-day finds
> issues, I can add them to the __GPF_COMP hit-list. :P

Oh! Nevermind, I see you did that already. Thank you! :)

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Nexus Security