linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 09/10] powerpc/fsl_booke/kaslr: support nokaslr cmdline parameter

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:   Thu, 8 Aug 2019 16:19:48 +0800
From:   Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com>
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, <diana.craciun@....com>,
        <christophe.leroy@....fr>, <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        <paulus@...ba.org>, <npiggin@...il.com>, <keescook@...omium.org>,
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        <yebin10@...wei.com>, <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>,
        <jingxiangfeng@...wei.com>, <fanchengyang@...wei.com>,
        <zhaohongjiang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/10] powerpc/fsl_booke/kaslr: support nokaslr cmdline
 parameter



On 2019/8/7 21:03, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com> writes:
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/kaslr_booke.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/kaslr_booke.c
>> index c6b326424b54..436f9a03f385 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/kaslr_booke.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/kaslr_booke.c
>> @@ -361,6 +361,18 @@ static unsigned long __init kaslr_choose_location(void *dt_ptr, phys_addr_t size
>>   	return kaslr_offset;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static inline __init bool kaslr_disabled(void)
>> +{
>> +	char *str;
>> +
>> +	str = strstr(boot_command_line, "nokaslr");
>> +	if (str == boot_command_line ||
>> +	    (str > boot_command_line && *(str - 1) == ' '))
>> +		return true;
> 
> This extra logic doesn't work for "nokaslrfoo". Is it worth it?
> 

Seems nobody likes this logic. Maybe I can delete this logic for now and
see if anyone has any objections.

> cheers
> 
> .
>