[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALS6=qVgYYxcjv8Fj4pdPJ0Z_fUceTV60DtKwOhFkSz4HZohxg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2018 01:25:48 +0800
From: Carter Cheng <cartercheng@...il.com>
To: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: temporal and spatial locality in the kernel
Hi,
I recently attended a computer security conference for the first time and
have developed some interest in kernel hardening issues after one of the
presenters demonstrated a kernel exploit based partly around a use after
free bug.
After scanning the literature a little bit and looking at some papers I
have encountered before on CCured and Cyclone. I was curious to what extent
full memory saftety checks are now possible.
There are many papers going back quite a bit on spatial safety
implementations and some on temporal safety but they mainly target user
space. I am curious why such things don't exist in the linux kernel at
least as some sort of compile option. Is the slow down the main concern?
It seems recent work has got the performance bound down to 1.29 is this
considered too slow for many things?
Regards,
Carter
Content of type "text/html" skipped
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.
