From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@intel.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>,
Eric Northup <digitaleric@google.com>,
Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@vsecurity.com>,
Julien Tinnes <jln@google.com>, Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86: kernel base offset ASLR
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 10:04:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130405080418.GG26889@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <515DE0C9.3030709@zytor.com>
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> I have to admit to being somewhat skeptical toward KASLR with only 8
> bits of randomness. There are at least two potential ways of
> dramatically increasing the available randomness:
>
> 1. actually compose the kernel of multiple independently relocatable
> pieces (maybe chunk it on 2M boundaries or something.)
>
> 2. compile the kernel as one of the memory models which can be executed
> anywhere in the 64-bit address space. The cost of this would have
> to be quantified, of course.
>
> The latter is particularly something that should be considered for the
> LPF JIT, to defend against JIT spray attacks.
The cost of 64-bit RIPs is probably measurable both in cache footprint and
in execution speed.
Doing that might make sense - but unless it's surprisingly cheap to do it,
at least from a distro perspective, randomizing the kernel base using the
existing compact address space would probably be the preferred option -
even if a bigger build model was available.
Random runtime shuffling of the kernel image - is that possible with
existing toolchains?
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-05 8:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-04 20:07 [PATCH 0/3] kernel ASLR Kees Cook
2013-04-04 20:07 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86: routines to choose random kernel base offset Kees Cook
2013-04-05 7:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-05 7:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-05 18:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-04 20:07 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86: build reloc tool for both 64 and 32 bit Kees Cook
2013-04-05 7:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-04 20:07 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86: kernel base offset ASLR Kees Cook
2013-04-04 20:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-04 20:19 ` Julien Tinnes
2013-04-04 20:23 ` Julien Tinnes
2013-04-04 20:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-04 20:48 ` Julien Tinnes
2013-04-05 7:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-04 20:54 ` Kees Cook
2013-04-04 20:58 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-04 21:00 ` Kees Cook
2013-04-04 21:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-04 21:04 ` Eric Northup
2013-04-04 21:06 ` Kees Cook
2013-04-04 21:00 ` Julien Tinnes
2013-04-04 21:01 ` Eric Northup
2013-04-05 7:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-04 20:21 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-04 20:47 ` Eric Northup
2013-04-05 1:08 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-05 8:04 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2013-04-05 15:30 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-08 11:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-08 14:58 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-05 18:17 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-05 20:01 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-04-05 20:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-05 20:19 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-04-05 20:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-05 7:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-05 22:06 ` Julien Tinnes
2013-04-05 22:08 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-05 22:13 ` Julien Tinnes
2013-04-05 7:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-05 12:12 ` Jiri Kosina
2013-04-05 14:49 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-04-05 20:19 ` Julien Tinnes
2013-04-05 20:43 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-04-05 23:18 ` Kees Cook
2013-04-06 10:10 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-04-08 12:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-04-11 20:52 ` [PATCH 0/3] kernel ASLR H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-11 21:28 ` Kees Cook
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=20130405080418.GG26889@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=digitaleric@google.com \
--cc=drosenberg@vsecurity.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jarkko.sakkinen@intel.com \
--cc=jln@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt.fleming@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mjg@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=wad@chromium.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).