From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v8 0/6] Introduce the STACKLEAK feature and a test for it References: <1518804657-24905-1-git-send-email-alex.popov@linux.com> <791341f5-4347-ba38-0710-93551a45ec38@linux.com> From: Laura Abbott Message-ID: Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 15:33:49 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Kees Cook , Alexander Popov , Thomas Gleixner , Andy Lutomirski Cc: Kernel Hardening , PaX Team , Brad Spengler , Ingo Molnar , Tycho Andersen , Mark Rutland , Ard Biesheuvel , Borislav Petkov , "H . Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , "Dmitry V . Levin" , X86 ML , Mohamed Ghannam List-ID: On 02/20/2018 03:17 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 2:29 AM, Alexander Popov wrote: >> On 16.02.2018 21:10, Alexander Popov wrote: >>> This is the 8th version of the patch series introducing STACKLEAK to the >>> mainline kernel. I've made some minor improvements while waiting for the >>> next review by x86 maintainers. > > If we can borrow some of luto or tglx's time, I think that'd be best: > they've been looking at the entry code a lot lately. :) Regardless, I > think the addition to the entry code is clean (especially now that the > fast path is gone *sob*). :P > >>> STACKLEAK is a security feature developed by Grsecurity/PaX (kudos to them), >>> which: >>> - reduces the information that can be revealed through kernel stack leak bugs; >>> - blocks some uninitialized stack variable attacks (e.g. CVE-2010-2963); >>> - introduces some runtime checks for kernel stack overflow detection. > > I've added this series to my kernel.org trees, which means 0-day will > start grinding on it too now: > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kees/linux.git > kspp/gcc-plugin/stackleak > > The LKDTM tests look great and check out for me. I think the code is > clear, so I'd like to get it into -next, but I want to be sure I'm not > stepping on x86 toes first. > > Laura, how does arm64 look for this? Would it be possible to add it to > this series (at least on kernel.org for build/run testing)? > I fell behind on rebasing/testing so I need to bring it up to date. Assuming the arm folks are okay with the approach, we can bring it in for kernel.org testing once I'm finished. Thanks, Laura