From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
To: Alon Bar-Lev <alon.barlev@gmail.com>
Cc: Brian Gerst <bgerst@didntduck.org>,
"Jonathan M. McCune" <jonmccune@cmu.edu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Arvind Seshadri <arvinds@cs.cmu.edu>, Bryan Parno <parno@cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: using segmentation in the kernel
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 22:12:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051011211215.GV7992@ftp.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <434C1F8E.6080405@gmail.com>
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 10:24:46PM +0200, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> Brian Gerst wrote:
> >Jonathan M. McCune wrote:
> >
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >Why send the kernel back to the 2.0 days? There is no valid reason for
> >doing this with they way x86 segmentation works, which is why it was
> >done away with in 2.1.
> >
>
> But with segmentation you can set code to be read-only,
> disallow execution from stack, separate modules so that they
> will not affect kernel and more...
You do realize that it's a BS, don't you?
* attacker that would rewrite kernel code can switch a pointer to method in
any of the method tables (or pointer to the entire method table, while we are
at it).
* overwriting return address is trivial if you got stack smashing and there
is a plenty of interesting functions in the kernel ready to elevate priveleges
* modules rely on practically complete access to kernel data structures, so
no amount of playing with rings will change anything for them.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-11 21:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-11 20:15 using segmentation in the kernel Jonathan M. McCune
2005-10-11 20:36 ` Brian Gerst
2005-10-11 20:24 ` Alon Bar-Lev
2005-10-11 21:12 ` Al Viro [this message]
2005-10-11 21:14 ` Brian Gerst
2005-10-12 9:05 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-10-12 16:07 ` Alan Cox
2005-10-12 15:44 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-10-12 23:55 ` Jonathan M. McCune
2005-10-12 13:03 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2005-10-13 8:51 ` Denis Vlasenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20051011211215.GV7992@ftp.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
--cc=alon.barlev@gmail.com \
--cc=arvinds@cs.cmu.edu \
--cc=bgerst@didntduck.org \
--cc=jonmccune@cmu.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=parno@cmu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.