linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] hash addresses printed with %p

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: <20171129212818.GK6217@eros>
Date:   Thu, 30 Nov 2017 08:28:18 +1100
From:   "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] hash addresses printed with %p

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 01:14:38PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Tobin C. Harding <me@...in.cc> wrote:
> >
> > If you haven't wasted enough time on this can you tell me what you mean
> > by 'completely breaks %pK'?
> 
> The whole point of %pK is that it's a "safer" %p that doesn't leak
> information if you set kptr_restrict.
> 
> With that patch-set, it now leaks _more_ information than %p when
> kptr_restrict isn't set, so %pK went from "be more careful than %p" to
> "be wildly less careful than %p".
> 
> Not because %pK itself changed, but because the semantics of %p did.
> The baseline moved, and the "safe" version did not.

Oh sweet, I was shitting bricks when I read your email :)