[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 15:43:21 +0200
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, hpa@...or.com,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
rick.p.edgecomb@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] module: Reorder functions
On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 15:37, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/20/2020 5:01 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > Is that the only prerequisite? I.e., is it sufficient for another
> > architecture to add -ffunction-sections to the module CFLAGS to get
> > this functionality? (assuming it defines CONFIG_FG_KASLR=y)
>
> I suspect you also need/want at least normal KASLR enabled as
> a "does it even make sense" common sense threshold
Fair enough. But that is more of a policy concern than a functional concern.
FWIW I took patches #8 and #9, hardwired a couple of CONFIG_FG_KASLR=y
checks and added the -ffunction-sections GCC option for the modules,
and everything appears to be working as expected on arm64. I was just
wondering if I was missing something.
Note that arm64 does not have a decompressor, so there the fine
grained randomization of the core kernel is not really feasible using
the approach presented here.
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.
