|
Message-ID: <feeb353566149eb807812ee74ba64d3238183b64.camel@intel.com> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 23:30:53 +0000 From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com> To: "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org> CC: "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, "suzuki.poulose@....com" <suzuki.poulose@....com>, "Szabolcs.Nagy@....com" <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>, "musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>, "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, "catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>, "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev" <kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev>, "oliver.upton@...ux.dev" <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>, "palmer@...belt.com" <palmer@...belt.com>, "debug@...osinc.com" <debug@...osinc.com>, "aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, "shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "maz@...nel.org" <maz@...nel.org>, "oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>, "fweimer@...hat.com" <fweimer@...hat.com>, "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>, "james.morse@....com" <james.morse@....com>, "ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, "brauner@...nel.org" <brauner@...nel.org>, "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>, "thiago.bauermann@...aro.org" <thiago.bauermann@...aro.org>, "hjl.tools@...il.com" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, "linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, "paul.walmsley@...ive.com" <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, "ardb@...nel.org" <ardb@...nel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, "sorear@...tmail.com" <sorear@...tmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/38] arm64/gcs: Provide support for GCS in userspace On Tue, 2024-02-20 at 20:14 +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > Hmm, could the shadow stack underflow onto the real stack then? Not > > sure how bad that is. INCSSP (incrementing the SSP register on x86) > > loops are not rare so it seems like something that could happen. > > Yes, they'd trash any pages of normal stack they touch as they do so > but > otherwise seems similar to overflow. I was thinking in the normal buffer overflow case there is a guard gap at the end of the stack, but in this case the shadow stack is directly adjacent to the regular stack. It's probably a minor point.
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.