Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 11:19:55 -0800 From: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>, Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>, kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 09/11] kallsyms: hide layout and expose seed On Mon, 2020-03-02 at 11:08 -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 11:01:56AM -0800, Kristen Carlson Accardi > wrote: > > On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 20:27 +0100, Jann Horn wrote: > > > https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=%2Fproc%2Fkallsyms&literal=1 > > > > I looked through some of these packages as Jann suggested, and it > > seems > > like there are several that are using /proc/kallsyms to look for > > specific symbol names to determine whether some feature has been > > compiled into the kernel. This practice seems dubious to me, > > knowing > > that many kernel symbol names can be changed at any time, but > > regardless seems to be fairly common. > > Cool, so a sorted censored list is fine for non-root. Would root > users > break on a symbol-name-sorted view? (i.e. are two lists needed or can > we > stick to one?) > Internally of course we'll always have to have 2 lists. I couldn't find any examples of even root users needing the list to be in order by address. At the same time, it feels like a less risky thing to do to leave root users with the same thing they've always had and only muck with non-root users.
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.