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]

Date:   Sat, 2 Dec 2017 08:51:52 +0000
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] hash addresses printed with %p

On 1 December 2017 at 16:33, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> And isn't there a specific %p modifier you should use for a kernel
>> pointer.  I've lost the thread here for what should, or should not, be
>> done for kernel pointers these days based on the long email discussion.
>
> Current implementation to bypass the hashing is %px. (Though perhaps
> all %px usage should include a comment with a justification?)
>

In this case, we're always dealing with u64 types regardless of the
pointer size and physical address size. So I am leaning towards
retaining the %llx, and only updating the sysfs node permissions.