|
Message-ID: <CAMj1kXHtT9Ope+rcuGipK20ovAWq7Vpt17zeLuFA=acRYPyxag@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 15:43:21 +0200 From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org> To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> Cc: Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, hpa@...or.com, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, rick.p.edgecomb@...el.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] module: Reorder functions On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 15:37, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> wrote: > > On 4/20/2020 5:01 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > Is that the only prerequisite? I.e., is it sufficient for another > > architecture to add -ffunction-sections to the module CFLAGS to get > > this functionality? (assuming it defines CONFIG_FG_KASLR=y) > > I suspect you also need/want at least normal KASLR enabled as > a "does it even make sense" common sense threshold Fair enough. But that is more of a policy concern than a functional concern. FWIW I took patches #8 and #9, hardwired a couple of CONFIG_FG_KASLR=y checks and added the -ffunction-sections GCC option for the modules, and everything appears to be working as expected on arm64. I was just wondering if I was missing something. Note that arm64 does not have a decompressor, so there the fine grained randomization of the core kernel is not really feasible using the approach presented here.
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.