linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/ibt: Implement FineIBT

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: <202210182220.B6247EF@keescook>
Date:   Tue, 18 Oct 2022 22:22:15 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
        Joao Moreira <joao@...rdrivepizza.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/ibt: Implement FineIBT

On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 04:31:48PM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Is there a reason not to default to FineIBT if the hardware supports it?

I think it's a fine default. Given the behavioral differences, though,
I'd like to make it configurable.

> If we're going to give the user choices then my previous rant about
> documentation still applies:
> 
>   https://lkml.kernel.org/lkml/20220503220244.vyz5flk3gg3y6rbw@treble

Totally agreed. I would be happy to pen something if no one else is
interested.

-- 
Kees Cook