[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 11:32:32 +1000
From: Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>
To: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Cc: Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: Don't fortify prom_init
prom_init is a bit special; in theory it should be able to be
linked separately to the kernel. To keep this from getting too
complex, the symbols that prom_init.c uses are checked.
Fortification adds symbols, and it gets quite messy as it includes
things like panic(). So just don't fortify prom_init.c for now.
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Axtens <dja@...ens.net>
---
This will need to go in before the main fortify support, but it
doesn't make any sense in the absence of fortify. I think it would
make most sense for Kees to queue this up with the main fortify patch,
with an Ack from mpe?
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c
index dd8a04f3053a..613f79f03877 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c
@@ -15,6 +15,9 @@
#undef DEBUG_PROM
+/* we cannot use FORTIFY as it brings in new symbols */
+#define __NO_FORTIFY
+
#include <stdarg.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/string.h>
--
2.11.0
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.
