[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 12:07:48 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: keescook@...omium.org, christoffer.dall@....com, will.deacon@....com,
catalin.marinas@....com, mark.rutland@....com, labbott@...oraproject.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PoC PATCH 0/3] arm64: basic ROP mitigation
On 08/02/2018 03:21 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> The idea is that we can significantly limit the kernel's attack surface
> for ROP based attacks by clearing the stack pointer's sign bit before
> returning from a function, and setting it again right after proceeding
> from the [expected] return address. This should make it much more difficult
> to return to arbitrary gadgets, given that they rely on being chained to
> the next via a return address popped off the stack, and this is difficult
> when the stack pointer is invalid.
Doesn't this break stack unwinding?
Thanks,
Florian
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.
