[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jLkvqbV1=xGrvwLZPiAbswA6M5C3BB0M5MytRabLtEfLg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 12:25:53 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] randstruct: Disable randomization of ACPICA structs
On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 01:56:40PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> Since the ACPICA source is maintained externally to the kernel, we can
>> neither switch it to designated initializers nor mark it
>> __no_randomize_layout. Until ACPICA-upstream changes[1] land to handle the
>> designated initialization, explicitly skip it in the plugin.
>
> NAK. ACPI has no business rejecting kernel changes to start with, but
> independent of that your patch was complete garbage anyway.
While I don't disagree with your opinion about ACPICA's inclusion in
the kernel, that isn't a battle I want to have. The ACPI maintainers
have a certain way of doing things, and what I need to change is tiny
compared to that.
> There is no need for function pointers here, please include the patch
> below instead:
Can you send the patch to https://github.com/acpica/acpica ? My change
was finally accepted, so this whole issue will go away on the next
refresh. Until then, I don't want to block the entire automatic
structure selection logic of randstruct on a three-function table. :)
Given that it's a tiny exclusion for randstruct, and there is already
a path in motion to fix it, I think this patch is trivial and
sufficient.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
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.
