[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 23:33:28 +0000
From: "Schaufler, Casey" <casey.schaufler@...el.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
CC: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com"
<kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: RE: For whoever's looking at memory santizing..
> -----Original Message-----
> From: keescook@...gle.com [mailto:keescook@...gle.com] On Behalf Of
> Kees Cook
> Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 9:24 AM
> To: Schaufler, Casey <casey.schaufler@...el.com>
> Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
> Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] For whoever's looking at memory santizing..
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Hanno Böck <hanno@...eck.de> wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 18:11:09 -0500
> > Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu> wrote:
> >
> >> If you need a real-life example of why we should be doing it
> >> consistently:
> >>
> >> http://venturebeat.com/2016/01/13/nvidia-blames-apple-for-bug-that-
> exposes-porn-browsing-in-chromes-incognito-mode/
> >
> > This article seems to be only about OS X.
> >
> > I hope it's no secret that this is a problem on Linux as well:
> > https://hsmr.cc/palinopsia/
> >
> > And from all I'm aware it's unfixed.
>
> I'm curious if this is fixable from the DRM layer, or if it's strictly
> driver-specific. Casey, could you bounce this toward some of the Intel
> graphics folks? While Intel isn't called out, I'm curious if there is
> still something that could be done in the general case...
The Intel graphics drivers (so I'm told) use memory allocated
in the shmem layer, and hence can count on it being cleared.
I don't know if that approach can be generalized, or if it would
even be possible for other drivers.
> -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.
