linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] bug: further enhance use of CHECK_DATA

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 4 Jan 2021 17:07:32 -0600
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        George Spelvin <lkml@....org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] bug: further enhance use of CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION

On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 03:12:11PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> This continues in applying the CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION tests where
> appropriate, and pulling similar CONFIGs under the same check. Most
> notably, this adds the checks to refcount_t so that system builders can
> Oops their kernels when encountering a potential refcounter attack. (And
> so now the LKDTM tests for refcount issues pass correctly.)
> 
> The series depends on the changes in -next made to lib/refcount.c,
> so it might be easiest if this goes through the locking tree...
> 
> v2 is a rebase to -next and adjusts to using WARN_ONCE() instead of WARN().
> 
> -Kees
> 
> v1 was here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/6/720

Ping?  Just wondering what ever happened to this 3+ year old series...

-- 
Josh