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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:30:02 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     mhiramat@...nel.org
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: kprobes vs __ex_table[]

Hi Masami,

I just wondered what would happen if I put a probe on an instruction
that was listed in __ex_table[] or __bug_table[].

And it looks like it will happily do that. It will then run the
instruction out-of-line, and when said instruction traps, the
instruction address will not match the one listed in either __ex_table[]
or __bug_table[] and badness will happen.

If kprobes does indeed not check this, we should probably fix it, if it
does do check this, could you point me to it?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists