Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 12:58:59 -0800 From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> To: Scott Bauer <sbauer@....utah.edu> Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, wmealing@...hat.com, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Abhiram Balasubramanian <abhiram@...utah.edu> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] SROP Mitigation: Architecture independent code for signal cookies On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Scott Bauer <sbauer@....utah.edu> wrote: > This patch adds a per-process secret to the task struct which > will be used during signal delivery and during a sigreturn. > Also, logic is added in signal.c to generate, place, extract, > clear and verify the signal cookie. > Potentially silly question: it's been a while since I read the SROP paper, but would the technique be effectively mitigated if sigreturn were to zero out the whole signal frame before returning to user mode?
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.