On 03/10/2014 10:12 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Linus Torvalds
> <torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 10, 2014 8:01 AM, "H. Peter Anvin" <h...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have mentioned in the past wanting to move the fixmap to the low part
>>> of the kernel space, because the top isn't really fixed...
>>
>> How about the high part of the user address space, just above the stack?
>> Leave a unmapped page in between, or something. The stack is already
>> randomized, isn't it?
>
> For the !compat_vdso case, I don't like it -- this will put the vdso
> (which is executable) at a constant offset from the stack, which will
> make it much easier to use the vdso to defeat ASLR.
>
> For the compat_vdso case, this only works if the address is *not*
> random, unless we're going to start giving each process its very own
> relocated vdso.
>
I presumed we were talking about compat_vdso, which thus simply turns
into a "don't randomize the vdso flag." A significant side benefit is
that this should make the code more similar.
> For 64-bit, this is an entirely different story. The vsyscall page is
> stuck in the fixmap forever, although I want to add a way for
> userspace to opt out. The vvar page, hpet, etc could move into vmas,
> though. I kind of want to do that anyway to allow processes to turn
> off the ability to read the clock.
Wait... you want to do what?!
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
