On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:31 AM, David Laight wrote:
>>
>> I can also image issues where you want to know whether 2 pointers point
>> into the same structure (like an skb).
>
> This is already retained due to the hashing. i.e. the same pointer
> v
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:31 AM, David Laight wrote:
> From: David Miller
>> Sent: 05 December 2017 20:31
> ...
>> > Would it make sense to keep the 3 lowest bits of the address?
>> >
>> > Currently printed pointers no longer have any correlation with the actual
>> > alignment in memory of the obje
From: David Miller
> Sent: 05 December 2017 20:31
...
> > Would it make sense to keep the 3 lowest bits of the address?
> >
> > Currently printed pointers no longer have any correlation with the actual
> > alignment in memory of the object, which is a typical cause of a class of
> > bugs.
>
> Yea
Hi Linus,
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> wrote:
>> Lowest 3 is good enough for all natural types, up to long long.
>> We may still receive complaints from people who care about seeing if
>> a pointer is cacheline-ali
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Lowest 3 is good enough for all natural types, up to long long.
> We may still receive complaints from people who care about seeing if
> a pointer is cacheline-aligned or not. Fixing that may need up to 7 bits, I'm
> afraid, which is a bi
Hi Tobin,
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 9:44 PM, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:20:57PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:05 AM, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
>> > Currently there exist approximately 14 000 places in the kernel where
>> > addresses are being
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 09:20:57PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Tobin,
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:05 AM, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> > Currently there exist approximately 14 000 places in the kernel where
> > addresses are being printed using an unadorned %p. This potentially
> > leaks
From: Geert Uytterhoeven
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 21:20:57 +0100
> Hi Tobin,
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:05 AM, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
>> Currently there exist approximately 14 000 places in the kernel where
>> addresses are being printed using an unadorned %p. This potentially
>> leaks sensiti
Hi Tobin,
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:05 AM, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> Currently there exist approximately 14 000 places in the kernel where
> addresses are being printed using an unadorned %p. This potentially
> leaks sensitive information regarding the Kernel layout in memory. Many
> of these cal
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:05:03 +1100 "Tobin C. Harding" wrote:
> Currently there exist approximately 14 000 places in the kernel where
> addresses are being printed using an unadorned %p. This potentially
> leaks sensitive information regarding the Kernel layout in memory. Many
> of these calls are
Currently there exist approximately 14 000 places in the kernel where
addresses are being printed using an unadorned %p. This potentially
leaks sensitive information regarding the Kernel layout in memory. Many
of these calls are stale, instead of fixing every call lets hash the
address by default b
11 matches
Mail list logo
