[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:07:31 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Cc: David Windsor <dave@...gbits.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/12] Add PAX_REFCOUNT overflow protection
Hi David,
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 6:57 AM, David Windsor <dave@...gbits.org> wrote:
>> NOTE: This is a v2 submission because patch 3/5 in v1 was too large to sent
>> to kernel-hardening. Taking that as a sign that the patch needed to be split,
>> I'm sending this version of the patchset, with the patches split more or less
>> on a per-maintainer basis (except for those in drivers/).
How's the next spin coming? It looks like we have some new real-world
examples of exploits that would have been blocked by this protection:
http://perception-point.io/2016/01/14/analysis-and-exploitation-of-a-linux-kernel-vulnerability-cve-2016-0728/
:)
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS & Brillo 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.
