Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 11:17:37 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> CC: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...el.com>, Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>, Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>, Eric Northup <digitaleric@...gle.com>, Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>, Julien Tinnes <jln@...gle.com>, Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86: kernel base offset ASLR On 04/05/2013 01:04 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > The cost of 64-bit RIPs is probably measurable both in cache footprint and > in execution speed. > Well, "probably" usually translates to "worth measuring" to me. > Random runtime shuffling of the kernel image - is that possible with > existing toolchains? I wanted to point out... yes this is hard, but it has the ability to be *much* stronger than any other form of KASLR simply because it means that a single infoleak doesn't give everything else away. -hpa
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.