linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] selftests/x86: Add test

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: <20180105190532.anqa2psj65dmlc4u@pd.tnic>
Date:   Fri, 5 Jan 2018 20:05:32 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:     X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] selftests/x86: Add test_vsyscall

On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 10:47:15AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> The remaining problem is that, for certain classes of userspace bugs,
> an attacker can take advantage of the vsyscall page's existence at a
> fixed address to cause mischief.  So opting out of having it be there
> could be helpful to mitigate attacks.

I understand that but how do you shoo people off the vsyscall page? You
need to tell old binaries about the per-process disablement and new
binaries to move to vdso.

Hmmm, add big fat warnings to vsyscall_64.c?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.