|
Message-ID: <20160814162226.GA7583@amd> Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 18:22:26 +0200 From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> To: william.c.roberts@...el.com Cc: jason@...edaemon.net, linux-mm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, keescook@...omium.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, nnk@...gle.com, jeffv@...gle.com, salyzyn@...roid.com, dcashman@...roid.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Introduce mmap randomization On Tue 2016-07-26 11:22:26, william.c.roberts@...el.com wrote: > From: William Roberts <william.c.roberts@...el.com> > > This patch introduces the ability randomize mmap locations where the > address is not requested, for instance when ld is allocating pages for > shared libraries. It chooses to randomize based on the current > personality for ASLR. > > Currently, allocations are done sequentially within unmapped address > space gaps. This may happen top down or bottom up depending on scheme. > > For instance these mmap calls produce contiguous mappings: > int size = getpagesize(); > mmap(NULL, size, flags, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x40026000 > mmap(NULL, size, flags, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x40027000 > > Note no gap between. > > After patches: > int size = getpagesize(); > mmap(NULL, size, flags, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x400b4000 > mmap(NULL, size, flags, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x40055000 > > Note gap between. Ok, I guess you can do it... but... what will be the effect on available address space for a process? By doing this, won't you fragment it horribly? This might be nasty on 32-bit systems... Best regards, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
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.