From: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>
To: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@it.uu.se>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Is kernel optimized with dead store removal?
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:14:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B8693B9.3060102@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19334.22971.970220.245930@pilspetsen.it.uu.se>
> > Does this optimization also occur during compilation of the Linux
> > kernel?
> Any such dead store removal is up to the compiler and the lifetime
> of the object being clobbered. For 'auto' objects the optimization
> is certainly likely.
>
> This is only a problem if the memory (a thread stack, say) is recycled
> and leaked uninitialized to user-space, but such bugs are squashed
> fairly quickly upon discovery.
Thanks for comments,
In the sha1_update() case I don't know whether the stack is recycled and
leaked - it may be dependent on the calling function, but isn't it
vulnerable?
I tested this with the snippet below. If compiled with -O1 or -O2 and
ON_STACK defined 1, I can read "Secret" a second time. With ON_STACK
defined 0 I do not.
Roel
---
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#define ON_STACK 1
void foo()
{
char password[] = "secret";
password[0]='S';
printf ("Don't show again: %s\n", password);
memset(password, 0, sizeof(password));
}
void foo2()
{
char* password = malloc(7);
strncpy (password, "secret" , 7);
password[6] = '\0';
password[0] = 'S';
printf ("Don't show again: %s\n", password);
memset(password, 0, 7);
free(password);
}
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
#if ON_STACK == 1
foo();
#else
foo2();
#endif
int i;
char foo3[] = "hoi";
printf ("foo1:%s\n", foo3);
char* bar = &foo3[0];
for (i = -50; i < 50; i++)
printf ("%c.", bar[i]);
printf("\n");
return 0;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-25 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-24 22:13 Is kernel optimized with dead store removal? Roel Kluin
2010-02-25 11:06 ` Mikael Pettersson
2010-02-25 15:14 ` Roel Kluin [this message]
2010-02-25 16:06 ` Mikael Pettersson
2010-02-25 18:24 ` Stefan Richter
2010-02-25 23:58 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
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=4B8693B9.3060102@gmail.com \
--to=roel.kluin@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikpe@it.uu.se \
/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