[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180110042551.GA13796@1wt.eu>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 05:25:51 +0100
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/6] x86/arch_prctl: add ARCH_GET_NOPTI and
ARCH_SET_NOPTI to enable/disable PTI
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 03:53:54PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Here's another idea: make it a module
> To enable it, you do modprobe pti_control allow_privileged_prctl=1.
This could be an idea. I know that some people insist on disabling
modules because they find this more secure so they won't be able to
use this. But after all they have to stand by their choice : either
they want maximum security or they want maximum performance.
Willy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists