linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/mmap: handle worst-case heap randomization in mmap

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: <20190419085140.GA50390@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Apr 2019 10:51:40 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     "Saidi, Ali" <alisaidi@...zon.com>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Liguori, Anthony" <aliguori@...zon.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "Woodhouse, David" <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/mmap: handle worst-case heap randomization in
 mmap_base


* Saidi, Ali <alisaidi@...zon.com> wrote:

> On 3/27/19, 2:52 PM, "linux-arm-kernel on behalf of Kees Cook" <linux-arm-kernel-bounces@...ts.infradead.org on behalf of keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> 
>     Adding some more people to CC... what do people think about this
>     moving of the brk to ELF_ET_DYN_BASE in this corner-case? Anything
>     that worked before should still work (i.e. the ultimately-launched
>     binary already had the brk very far from its text, so this should be
>     no different from a COMPAT_BRK standpoint). The only risk I see here
>     is that if someone started to suddenly depend on the entire memory
>     space above the mmap region being available when launching binaries
>     via a direct loader execs... which seems highly unlikely, I'd hope:
>     this would mean a binary would not work when execed normally.
> 
> Kees' proposal addresses the issue for me. Anyone have concerns on this proposed solution?

I'd suggest incorporating all feedback and sending a v2 series - it's 
much easier to get people's attention via code submitted. ;-)

Thanks,

	Ingo