Re: [PATCH v2] kaslr: allow kASLR to be default over Hibernation

[Pavel Machek]

On Fri 2016-04-15 12:25:19, Emrah Demir wrote:
> On 2016-04-14 18:42, Kees Cook wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>On Thu 2016-04-14 13:14:07, Kees Cook wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> Hi!
> >>>>
> >>>>> Since kASLR and Hibernation can not currently coexist at runtime
> >>>>> on x86, the default behavior was to disable kASLR by default when
> >>>>> CONFIG_HIBERNATION was present (to retain original behavior).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The behavior of kASLR on arm64 (and soon MIPS) is to be enabled by
> >>>>> default when selected at build time. Since arm64 Hibernation does not
> >>>>> conflict with kASLR, this fixes the hibernation argument parsing to be
> >>>>> x86-specific. Additionally, since end users want to be able to select
> >>>>> kASLR on x86 by default at build time, create CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE_ON
> >>>>> that is present only on x86.
> 
> >>>>
> >>>> I believe this is bad idea. arm64 shows that kaslr and hibernation can
> >>>> coexist, and hibernation is still useful when your battery runs out.
> >>>
> >>>What? I'm confused -- this patch leaves the x86 behavior as-is by
> >>>default but allows hibernation to work with arm64. (For example, right
> >>>now, if you boot arm64 with "kaslr" kernel argument, hibernation will
> >>>get needlessly disabled.)
> >>
> 
> So what about making new kernel parameters. "hibernate" and "nohibernate"
> 
> This way before decompression it will look at the parameters and depend on
> parameters it will act differently
> 
> "kaslr" "nohibernate"  -->  kASLR will enable, no hibernate
> 
> "nokaslr" "nohibernate" --> Neither of them will work
> 
> "kaslr" "hiberante"   ---> Owner has to face consequences(ARM has
> advantages)
> 
> "nokaslr" "hibernate"  ---> kASLR disabled and hibernate will works.
> 
> Before writing something I want to know your ideas.

Patch fixing hibernation with kaslr on x86 and x86-64 would be
welcome.

Adding command line options that will become useless when kernel is
fixed ... not so much.

Best regards,
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html