|
Message-ID: <1475788788.1820.4.camel@perches.com> Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:19:48 -0700 From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> Cc: "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@...el.com>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>, "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: introduce kptr_restrict level 3 On Thu, 2016-10-06 at 14:00 -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > And based on my read of this thread, we all appear to be in violent > agreement. :) "always protect %p" is absolutely the goal, and we can > figure out the best way to get there. I proposed emitting pointers from the const and text sections by default and using NULL for data pointers. https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/5/380
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.