Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 23:25:08 -0500 From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> To: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Re: [RFC v4 PATCH 00/13] HARDENED_ATOMIC On Thu, 2016-11-10 at 13:23 -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > If we don't use opt-out for atomics, we're going to be in the same > situation where we have to constantly review every commit with an > atomic for exploitable refcount flaws. Kicking this down from > "privilege escalation" to "DoS" is a significant change in the > kernel's weaknesses. The only way I see around that would be to totally get rid of the name atomic_t, forcing people with out of tree code to use kref_t, or whatever name we pick for the variable type that can wrap. Something like checkpatch or a patch checking bot could warn whenever new code is submitted that uses the counter type that can wrap. Not sure whether I like my idea :) -- All Rights Reversed. Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 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.