linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: Add additional consistency check

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]

Message-ID: <20170411193948.GA29154@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Tue, 11 Apr 2017 21:39:48 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Add additional consistency check

On Tue 11-04-17 13:59:44, Cristopher Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> 
> > I didn't say anything like that. Hence the proposed patch which still
> > needs some more thinking and evaluation.
> 
> This patch does not even affect kfree().

Ehm? Are we even talking about the same thing? The whole discussion was
to catch invalid pointers to _kfree_ and why BUG* is not the best way to
handle that. 

> Could you start another
> discussion thread where you discuss your suggestions for the changes in
> the allocators and how we could go about this?

I presume Kees will pursue
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170411141956.GP6729@dhcp22.suse.cz or
something along those lines.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs