linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] rseq: Kill process when unknown flags are encountered in ABI structures

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]

Message-ID: <YugsQDLJJ/385wRP@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 1 Aug 2022 21:40:48 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Oskolkov <posk@...k.io>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        Carlos O'Donell <carlos@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rseq: Kill process when unknown flags are
 encountered in ABI structures


* Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:

> The projects I know about that use rseq at the moment don't rely on the 
> old ABI ignoring unset flags:
> 
> - glibc initialize the rseq_abi()->flags to 0 and do not use rseq_abi()->rseq_cs->flags yet.
> - tcmalloc initialize rseq_abi()->flags and rseq_abi()->rseq_cs->flags to 0.
> - librseq (still only a master branch, no officially released public API yet) initialize
>   rseq_abi()->flags and rseq_abi()->rseq_cs->cs_flags to 0.
> - the Linux kernel selftests initialize rseq_abi()->flags and rseq_abi()->rseq_cs->cs_flags
>   to 0.
> - AFAIK DynamoRIO does not rely on the kernel ignoring unset flags bits.
> - AFAIK CRIU does not rely on the kernel ignoring unset flags bits.

Thanks - that's exhaustive enough.

> If anyone else rely on rseq ignoring those unset flags, please yell now.

Well, people are unlikely to see random lkml mails - but if gets reported 
as a regression then we need to revert. But I don't expect it to happen.

Thanks,

	Ingo