linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: make CFI_AUTO

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: <CANiq72=NymSwziZw1a0PUNyJ=TCN5tkr3PojJRQ0sjqFWDjz-g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2025 11:04:16 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, 
	Paweł Anikiel <panikiel@...gle.com>, 
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, 
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, 
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, 
	Matthew Maurer <mmaurer@...gle.com>, Ramon de C Valle <rcvalle@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/Kconfig: make CFI_AUTO_DEFAULT depend on !RUST

On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 10:46 AM Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Actually ... I don't think putting it on CFI_AUTO_DEFAULT the right
> approach.
>
> Shouldn't the depends on clause go on `config FINEIBT` instead? After
> all, the current patch just means that you can't make FineIBT the
> default option. But you can still pass kcfi=fineibt on boot to enble
> FineIBT which would result in the same crash.

I thought the intention was to avoid disabling FineIBT at config time:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/202504161442.66CE2596@keescook/

If another approach is needed, then we can change it on top if that is
OK (I am about to submit the PR).

Cheers,
Miguel