[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171017203516.3746395e@vmware.local.home>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 20:35:16 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Paolo
Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ker.com>, "Roberts,
William C" <william.c.roberts@...el.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jordan
Glover <Golden_Miller83@...tonmail.ch>, Greg KH
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Joe Perches
<joe@...ches.com>, Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>, Sergey Senozhatsky
<sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Chris Fries <cfries@...gle.com>, Dave
Weinstein <olorin@...gle.com>, Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>, Djalal
Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] printk: hash addresses printed with %p
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 10:15:59 +1100
"Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc> wrote:
> > Does %p[FfSs] leak addresses? Well, I guess it does if they are not
> > found in kallsyms, but otherwise you have:
> >
> > function+0x<offset>
>
> You are correct %pF and %pS print an offset. Does this provide an attack vector,
> I didn't think so but I'm no security expert. If they do then we need to amend
> those calls also.
Hopefully not. We changed stack dumps to use them only instead of
showing addresses because of the location leak.
-- Steve
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.
