[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1309721875.18925.30.camel@Joe-Laptop>
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 12:37:55 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Thomas Gleixner
<tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin"
<hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Christoph
Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, Matt
Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC v1] implement SL*B and stack
usercopy runtime checks
On Sun, 2011-07-03 at 23:24 +0400, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
> Btw, if the perfomance will be acceptable, what do you think about
> logging/reacting on the spotted overflows?
If you do, it might be useful to track the found location(s)
and only emit the overflow log entry once as found.
Maybe use __builtin_return_address(depth) for tracking.
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.
