[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:54:54 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
Cc: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Pratyush Anand <panand@...hat.com>, keun-o.park@...kmatter.ae
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] arm64: usercopy: Implement stack frame object validation
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:30 AM, James Morse <james.morse@....com> wrote:
> Hi Kees,
>
> On 28/03/17 23:34, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:29 AM, James Morse <james.morse@....com> wrote:
>>>> This version of Sahara's arch_within_stack_frames() series replaces the
>>>> open-coded stack walker with a call to arm64's existing walker.
>
>> Is this still in progress? Seemed like it was very close?
>
> Ah, sorry, I lost track of this when it jumped between mail folders... Sahara
> had comments on the last patch.
>
> How does all this fit with Al Viro's uaccess unification tree?:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/29/61
It's orthogonal, though it results in bringing the hardened usercopy
to more architectures... (but the stack walker is still needed on a
per-arch basis).
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
