[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 17:01:14 -0400
From: Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de>, Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, LKML
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] fork: make whole stack_canary
random
> It makes a lot of sense on x86_64 where it means the canary is still
> 56
> bits. Also, you want -fstack-check for protecting again stack
> overflows
> rather than stack *buffer* overflow. SSP won't really help you in that
> regard. Sadly, while -fstack-check now works well in GCC 6 with little
> performance cost, it's not really a complete feature (and Clang impls
> it
> as a no-op!).
Note: talking about userspace after the entropy bit. The kernel doesn't
really -fstack-check, at least in even slightly sane code...
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
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.
