linux-kernel - Re: [DISCUSSION] kstack offset randomization: bugs and performance

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: <202511271111.A9BC57E2C@keescook>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 11:17:04 -0800
From: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] kstack offset randomization: bugs and performance

On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 02:09:04PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>     no: rip out kstack offset randomization

Uh, no. There are system builders that have no problem with the current
performance. The _feature_ must stay because it has users. Whether it is
default-enabled, etc, sure, I have no problem with making changes there.
Whatever we can do to make it better, I obviously welcome, but we can't
remove it.

-- 
Kees Cook