[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 15:56:07 -0800
From: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...omium.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
Jia Zhang <qianyue.zj@...baba-inc.com>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 20/27] x86: Support global stack cookie
On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 2:36 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 1, 2019, at 12:21 PM, Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 11:27 AM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:29 AM Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...omium.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Add an off-by-default configuration option to use a global stack cookie
> >>> instead of the default TLS. This configuration option will only be used
> >>> with PIE binaries.
> >>>
> >>> For kernel stack cookie, the compiler uses the mcmodel=kernel to switch
> >>> between the fs segment to gs segment. A PIE binary does not use
> >>> mcmodel=kernel because it can be relocated anywhere, therefore the
> >>> compiler will default to the fs segment register. This is fixed on the
> >>> latest version of gcc.
> >>
> >> I hate all these gcc-sucks-so-we-hack-it-and-change-nasty-semantics
> >> options. How about just preventing use of both stack protector and
> >> PIE unless the version of gcc in use is new enough.
> >
> > So fail the build in this scenario?
>
> Fail the build or use some Kconfig magic to prevent this from being configured in the first place.
Ok, I can do that in next iteration.
>
> >
> >>
> >> Also, does -mstack-protector-guard-reg not solve this? See
> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81708. Or is there
> >> another bug? Or are you worried about gcc versions that don't have
> >> that feature yet?
> >
> > I am worried about gcc versions that don't have this feature, yes.
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.
