Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 15:06:12 -0800
From: Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>,
 kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu>,
 Brad Spengler <spender@...ecurity.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
 Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
 Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
 Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v6 5/6] fs/proc: Show STACKLEAK metrics in the /proc
 file system

On 12/06/2017 12:40 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On 12/05/2017 03:33 PM, Alexander Popov wrote:
>>> diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
>>> index 28fa852..3569446 100644
>>> --- a/fs/proc/base.c
>>> +++ b/fs/proc/base.c
>>> @@ -2884,6 +2884,17 @@ static int proc_pid_patch_state(struct seq_file *m,
>>> struct pid_namespace *ns,
>>>    }
>>>    #endif /* CONFIG_LIVEPATCH */
>>>    +#ifdef CONFIG_STACKLEAK_METRICS
>>> +static int proc_lowest_stack(struct seq_file *m, struct pid_namespace
>>> *ns,
>>> +                               struct pid *pid, struct task_struct *task)
>>> +{
>>> +       seq_printf(m, "prev_lowest_stack: %pK\nlowest_stack: %pK\n",
>>> +                  (void *)task->thread.prev_lowest_stack,
>>> +                  (void *)task->thread.lowest_stack);
>>> +       return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_STACKLEAK_METRICS */
>>> +
>>
>>
>> This just prints the hashed value with the new pointer leak work.
>> I don't think we want to print the fully exposed value via %px so
>> it's not clear how valuable this proc file is now.
> 
> Maybe print the size, not the location?
> 
> -Kees
> 
Hmmmmm, that starts to overlap with CONFIG_DEBUG_STACK_USAGE.
That's not a bad thing but it would be good to clarify what
this is tracking vs. CONFIG_DEBUG_STACK_USAGE.

Thanks,
Laura

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ