From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Reply-To: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 13:53:22 -0700 From: Andi Kleen Message-ID: <20160329205322.GB9083@tassilo.jf.intel.com> References: <1459281207-24377-1-git-send-email-sbauer@eng.utah.edu> <1459281207-24377-4-git-send-email-sbauer@eng.utah.edu> <20160329195906.GA9083@tassilo.jf.intel.com> <56FAE98B.8040008@eng.utah.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56FAE98B.8040008@eng.utah.edu> Subject: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] Sysctl: SROP Mitigation: Add Sysctl argument to disable SROP. To: Scotty Bauer Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, x86@kernel.org, luto@amacapital.net, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, wmealing@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Abhiram Balasubramanian , Scott Bauer List-ID: On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 02:46:03PM -0600, Scotty Bauer wrote: > > > > On 03/29/2016 01:59 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 01:53:26PM -0600, Scott Bauer wrote: > >> This patch adds a sysctl argument to disable SROP protection. > > > > Sysctl needs to be documented in Documentation/sysctl/ > > > > Also negated sysctl is weird, normally they are positive (enable-xxx) > > > > Sure, I can change it. This may be a dumb question: I want SROP to be enabled by default, and thus the new > enable-xxx will be initialized to 1, that's fine, right? Yes that's fine. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only