Re: [PATCH v2] all arches, signal: Move restart_block to struct task_struct

[Richard Weinberger]

Am 11.11.2014 um 03:13 schrieb David Miller:
> From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 14:03:23 -0800
> 
>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 29 Oct 2014, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>
>>>> If an attacker can cause a controlled kernel stack overflow,
>>>> overwriting the restart block is a very juicy exploit target.
>>>> Moving the restart block to struct task_struct prevents this
>>>> exploit.
>>>>
>>>> Note that there are other fields in thread_info that are also easy
>>>> targets, at least on some architectures.
>>>>
>>>> It's also a decent simplification, since the restart code is more or
>>>> less identical on all architectures.
>>>
>>> I think that's the most important change. Moving common stuff into
>>> common code. The side effect of slightly reducing the attack surface
>>> is nice, but as Al pointed out not really the big win here.
>>
>> Having gotten exactly zero feedback from any arch maintainer outside
>> of x86, am I supposed to pester people further?
> 
> No objections wrt. sparc and if things break I'll help fix it.

Same for UML.
Acked-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>

Thanks,
//richard
--
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/