[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 23:30:53 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"suzuki.poulose@....com" <suzuki.poulose@....com>, "Szabolcs.Nagy@....com"
<Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>, "musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>, "corbet@....net"
<corbet@....net>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev"
<kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev>, "oliver.upton@...ux.dev" <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
"palmer@...belt.com" <palmer@...belt.com>, "debug@...osinc.com"
<debug@...osinc.com>, "aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
"shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"maz@...nel.org" <maz@...nel.org>, "oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>,
"fweimer@...hat.com" <fweimer@...hat.com>, "keescook@...omium.org"
<keescook@...omium.org>, "james.morse@....com" <james.morse@....com>,
"ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, "brauner@...nel.org"
<brauner@...nel.org>, "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"thiago.bauermann@...aro.org" <thiago.bauermann@...aro.org>,
"hjl.tools@...il.com" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
"paul.walmsley@...ive.com" <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, "ardb@...nel.org"
<ardb@...nel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org"
<linux-mm@...ck.org>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org"
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, "sorear@...tmail.com" <sorear@...tmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/38] arm64/gcs: Provide support for GCS in userspace
On Tue, 2024-02-20 at 20:14 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Hmm, could the shadow stack underflow onto the real stack then? Not
> > sure how bad that is. INCSSP (incrementing the SSP register on x86)
> > loops are not rare so it seems like something that could happen.
>
> Yes, they'd trash any pages of normal stack they touch as they do so
> but
> otherwise seems similar to overflow.
I was thinking in the normal buffer overflow case there is a guard gap
at the end of the stack, but in this case the shadow stack is directly
adjacent to the regular stack. It's probably a minor point.
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.
