* [kernel-hardening] ARMv8.0 PAN emulation
@ 2016-04-13 15:34 Kees Cook
2016-04-15 8:58 ` [kernel-hardening] " Catalin Marinas
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2016-04-13 15:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Catalin Marinas; +Cc: kernel-hardening
Hi Catalin,
I was curious about where PAN emulation for ARMv8.0 stood? You'd
mentioned[1] that it might be possible to rework the TTBR0 patch to do
what's needed. Is there anyone that has cycles to work on it?
Also, did you ever get an answer about the lowmem boundary?
Thanks,
-Kees
[1] http://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2016/01/13/7
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS & Brillo Security
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [kernel-hardening] Re: ARMv8.0 PAN emulation
2016-04-13 15:34 [kernel-hardening] ARMv8.0 PAN emulation Kees Cook
@ 2016-04-15 8:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-04-20 22:59 ` Kees Cook
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Catalin Marinas @ 2016-04-15 8:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kees Cook; +Cc: kernel-hardening
Hi Kees,
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 08:34:31AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> I was curious about where PAN emulation for ARMv8.0 stood?
I guess the question is with regards to the arm64 kernel port.
> You'd mentioned[1] that it might be possible to rework the TTBR0 patch
> to do what's needed. Is there anyone that has cycles to work on it?
Unfortunately, not. I can put it on our to-do list but the backlog is
pretty large already, so I can't realistically state an ETA.
> Also, did you ever get an answer about the lowmem boundary?
No but I looked through the arm32 kernel and couldn't find any
guarantees. IIRC, we used to have such assumption in the past until we
got the TI Keystone platform with RAM being relocated above 4GB (after
the initial boot code).
--
Catalin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [kernel-hardening] Re: ARMv8.0 PAN emulation
2016-04-15 8:58 ` [kernel-hardening] " Catalin Marinas
@ 2016-04-20 22:59 ` Kees Cook
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2016-04-20 22:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Catalin Marinas; +Cc: kernel-hardening
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 1:58 AM, Catalin Marinas
<catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi Kees,
>
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 08:34:31AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> I was curious about where PAN emulation for ARMv8.0 stood?
>
> I guess the question is with regards to the arm64 kernel port.
Yeah, in non-LPAE mode, we're covered by Domains, IIUC.
>> You'd mentioned[1] that it might be possible to rework the TTBR0 patch
>> to do what's needed. Is there anyone that has cycles to work on it?
>
> Unfortunately, not. I can put it on our to-do list but the backlog is
> pretty large already, so I can't realistically state an ETA.
Okay, no worries. I'll add this to my list of "things we need someone
to work on". :)
>> Also, did you ever get an answer about the lowmem boundary?
>
> No but I looked through the arm32 kernel and couldn't find any
> guarantees. IIRC, we used to have such assumption in the past until we
> got the TI Keystone platform with RAM being relocated above 4GB (after
> the initial boot code).
Okay, good to know.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS & Brillo Security
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-04-20 22:59 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-04-13 15:34 [kernel-hardening] ARMv8.0 PAN emulation Kees Cook
2016-04-15 8:58 ` [kernel-hardening] " Catalin Marinas
2016-04-20 22:59 ` Kees Cook
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).