linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rtc: armada38x: add __ro_after_init to armada38x_rtc

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:   Wed, 4 Jan 2017 14:41:16 +0100 (CET)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
cc:     Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, andrew@...n.ch,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        rtc-linux@...glegroups.com, a.zummo@...ertech.it,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com,
        Bhumika Goyal <bhumirks@...il.com>,
        sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: armada38x: add __ro_after_init to
 armada38x_rtc_ops



On Wed, 4 Jan 2017, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 01:23:41PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > Basically, the strategy of the patch is that one may consider it
> > preferable to duplicate the structure for the different alternatives,
> > rather than use __ro_after_init.  Perhaps if the structure were larger,
> > then __ro_after_init would be a better choice?
>
> It depends on not just the size, but how many members need to be
> modified, and obviously whether there are likely to be more than one
> user of the structure as well.
>
> So I'd say __ro_after_init rarely makes sense for an operations
> structure - the only case I can see is:
>
> - a large structure
> - only a small number of elements need to be modified
> - it is only single-use
>
> which is probably quite rare - this one falls into two out of those
> three.
>
> There's another consideration (imho) too - we may wish, at a later
> date, to make .text and .rodata both read-only from the start of the
> kernel to harden the kernel against possibly init-time exploitation.
> (Think about a buggy built-in driver with emulated hardware - much the
> same problem that Kees is trying to address in one of his recent patch
> sets but with hotplugged hardware while a screen-saver is active.)
> Having function pointers in .rodata rather than the ro-after-init
> section would provide better protection.

OK, thanks for the explanations.

julia