Thread (19 messages) 19 messages, 3 authors, 2015-02-18

Re: [PATCH v2] x86, kaslr: propagate base load address calculation

From: Kees Cook <hidden>
Date: 2015-02-16 19:27:45
Also in: lkml

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:55 AM, Borislav Petkov [off-list ref] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 03:25:26PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
quoted
No, no; I agree: a malicious boot loader is a lost cause. I mean
mostly from a misbehavior perspective. Like, someone sees "kaslr" in
the setup args and thinks they can set it to 1 and boot a kernel, etc.
Or they set it to 0, but they lack HIBERNATION and "1" gets appended,
but the setup_data parser sees the boot-loader one set to 0, etc. I'm
just curious if we should avoid getting some poor system into a
confusing state.
Well, we can apply the rule of the last setting sticks and since the
kernel is always going to be adding the last setup_data element of
type SETUP_KASLR (the boot loader ones will be somewhere on the list
in-between and we add to the end), we're fine, no?
Sounds good to me!

-Kees
--
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--


-- 
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help