Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:58:34 +0300 | From | Aaro Koskinen <> | Subject | Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ARM ATTEND] catching up on exploit mitigations |
| |
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 07:15:33PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 02:11:20AM +0300, Aaro Koskinen wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 06:14:35PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:05:40PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > > > - fuzzing (is anyone running trinity or similar on the ARM tree?) > > > > > > Someone was kind enough to send me an arm chromebook, so I tried this just > > > last week (albeit, on the 3.4 kernel it shipped with). The results make > > > me think the answer is a resounding 'no'. > > > > Shouldn't you run trinity only under QEMU or similar virtual > > environment? Don't know about chromebook, but on some of my ARM boards > > a misbehaving kernel could at least in theory brick the board... > > I like to live dangerously. Don't imitate everything you see on TV, > or read about on lkml.
Sadly I have no TV. :)
Anyway, I think it would be interesting to learn about arch-specific bugs discovered with trinity. Quickly thinking, the results should be mostly same regardless of the architecture since the code being tested is generic especially when running as a regular user. But of course there are 32/64-bit and big-endian/little-endian and such differences, and maybe some permission bugs (likely in vendor kernels).
A.
| |