linux-kernel - Re: Designated initializers, struct randomization and addressing?

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:   Tue, 3 Jan 2017 15:55:59 -0800
From:   Bruce Korb <bruce.korb@...il.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
        Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>,
        Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
        Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
        James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "John L. Hammond" <john.hammond@...el.com>,
        Emoly Liu <emoly.liu@...el.com>,
        Vitaly Fertman <vitaly_fertman@...atex.com>,
        Bruno Faccini <bruno.faccini@...el.com>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: Designated initializers, struct randomization and addressing?

As a tangential party, I am a bit curious: does the randomization
plugin result in a compact structure?  I ask because I know many/most
programmers don't bother with it and so doing so ought to make the
data more compact.

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>> how is the code to be verified so that
>> any use of things like offsetof and any
>> address/indexing is not impacted?