Re: [patch 0/5] Support for sanitization flag in low-level pageallocator

[Larry H.]

On 09:30 Sun 31 May     , Pekka Enberg wrote:
> Larry H. wrote:
>> OK, I'm going to squeeze some time and provide patches that perform the
>> same my original page bit ones did, but using kzfree. Behold code like
>> in the tty buffer management, which uses the page allocator directly for
>> allocations greater than PAGE_SIZE in length. That needs special
>> treatment, and is exactly the reason I've proposed unconditional
>> sanitization since the original patches were rejected.
>
> You might want to also do the patch Alan suggested for the security 
> conscious people. That is, do a memset() in every page free and wrap that 
> under CONFIG_SECURITY_PARANOIA or something. There's no reason the kzfree() 
> patches and that can't co-exist.

I know you came late into the discussion, but if you had invested a
minute checking the thread, you would have spotted a patch in which a
Kconfig option was used to disable the sensitive page flag effects as whole.
The very first one.

I'm not wasting my time re-workign a patch which has been already
rejected. Go ahead and do it in your own time if you wish, it's GPL
anyway.

	Larry

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/