[lkml]   [2018]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 4/6] Protectable Memory
On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 2:57 PM, Igor Stoppa <> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>>> It's worth having a discussion about whether we want the pmalloc API
>>>> or whether we want a slab-based API.
> I'd love to have some feedback specifically about the API.
> I have also some idea about userspace and how to extend the pmalloc
> concept to it:
> I'll be AFK intermittently for about 2 weeks, so i might not be able to
> reply immediately, but from my perspective this would be just the
> beginning of a broader hardening of both kernel and userspace that I'd
> like to pursue.
> --
> igor

Regarding the notion of validated protected memory, is there a method
by which the resulting checksum could be used in a lookup
table/function to resolve the location of the protected data?
Effectively a hash table of protected allocations, with a benefit of
dedup since any data matching the same key would be the same data
(multiple identical cred structs being pushed around). Should leave
the resolver address/csum in recent memory to check against, right?

Boris Lukashev
Systems Architect
Semper Victus

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-02-03 21:13    [W:0.068 / U:20.868 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site