[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:19:48 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@...el.com>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com"
<kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: introduce kptr_restrict level 3
On Thu, 2016-10-06 at 14:00 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> And based on my read of this thread, we all appear to be in violent
> agreement. :) "always protect %p" is absolutely the goal, and we can
> figure out the best way to get there.
I proposed emitting pointers from the const and text sections by default
and using NULL for data pointers.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/5/380
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.
