On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 12:19:05PM +0300, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 05.04.19 06:06, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> > This does bring to mind the clunkiness of the above. Marking
> > *everything* executable bypasses the improved security provided by the
> > firmware. Should I register a bug on Savannah to address this?
> > (blatantly not for the upcoming release)
>
> I quite frankly don't understand why we need to mark the PE binary as
> CODE in the first place. I thought the whole point of invoking the UEFI
> loader protocol was to ensure that the placement of sections from that
> binary into CODE/DATA happens properly?
You have a point, but I don't think Jeffrey found this through code
review.
It is possible that my belt-and-braces approach of both adding a
memory mapped device path and setting SourceBuffer breaks assumptions
in the UEFI implementation.
Jeffrey - could you try changing
status = b->load_image (0, grub_efi_image_handle,
(grub_efi_device_path_t *) mempath,
(void *) addr,
size, &image_handle);
to
status = b->load_image (0, grub_efi_image_handle,
NULL,
(void *) addr,
size, &image_handle);
and see if that makes the problem go away without changing the
allocation type?
> Or are we not calling LoadImage?
We are.
/
Leif
_______________________________________________
Grub-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
