[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPDLWs9vqBYJs+OUHyfs_tKVY1RUS5JMtp4N6LjgHn5z0pgaqA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 10:57:16 +0530
From: Kaiwan N Billimoria <kaiwan@...wantech.com>
To: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
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 <wilal.deacon@....com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Chris Fries <cfries@...gle.com>, Dave Weinstein <olorin@...gle.com>,
Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>, Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v4] scripts: add leaking_addresses.pl
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Tobin C. Harding <me@...in.cc> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 06:37:28AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:06:46AM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
>> > On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 02:10:07AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
...
>> >
>> > Thanks for the link. So it looks like we need to refactor the kernel
>> > address regular expression into a function that takes into account the
>> > machine architecture and the number of page table levels. We will need
>> > to add this to the false positive checks also.
>> >
>> > > Not sure if we care. It won't work too for other 64-bit architectrues that
>> > > have more than 256TB of virtual address space.
>> >
>> > Is this because of the virtual memory map?
>>
>> On x86 direct mapping is the nearest thing we have to userspace.
>>
>> > Did you mean 512TB?
>>
>> No, I mean 256TB.
>>
>> You have all kernel memory in the range from 0xffff000000000000 to
>> 0xffffffffffffffff if you have 256 TB of virtual address space. If you
>> hvae more, some thing might be ouside the range.
>
> Doesn't 4-level paging already limit a system to 64TB of memory? So any
> system better equipped than this will use 5-level paging right? If I am
> totally talking rubbish please ignore, I'm appreciative that you pointed
> out the limitation already. Perhaps we can add a comment to the script
>
> # Script may miss some addresses on machines with more than 256TB of
> # memory.
I think the 256TB is wrt *virtual* address space not physical RAM.
Also, IMHO, the script should 'transparently' take into account the # of paging
levels (instead of the user needing to pass a parameter).
IOW it should be able to detect the same (say, from the .config file) and act
accordingly - in the sense, the regex's and associated logic would accordingly
differ.
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.
