linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v20 4/8] fork: Add shadow stack support to clone3()

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: <202509050900.8A01B1E6@keescook>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2025 09:00:51 -0700
From: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
	"Rick P. Edgecombe" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
	Deepak Gupta <debug@...osinc.com>,
	Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>,
	"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
	Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, jannh@...gle.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Yury Khrustalev <yury.khrustalev@....com>,
	Wilco Dijkstra <wilco.dijkstra@....com>,
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 4/8] fork: Add shadow stack support to clone3()

On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 04:43:22PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 05:21:59PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 11:21:48AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > +		.shadow_stack_token	= args.shadow_stack_token,
> 
> > I'm not sure why this has to be named "shadow_stack_token" I think
> > that's just confusing and we should just call it "shadow_stack" and be
> > done with it. It's also a bit long of a field name imho.
> 
> I'm not hugely attached to the name, if you want to rename that's
> perfectly fine by me.  My thinking was that there's a potential
> confusion with it being a pointer to the base of the shadow stack by
> comparison with the existing "stack" but I do agree that the resulting
> name is quite long and if someone does actually get confused they should
> discover the problem fairly rapidly in testing.  ss_token would shorter
> but the abbreviation is less clear, whatever name you prefer is fine by
> me.

Bike shed: shstk_token?


-- 
Kees Cook