Re: [kernel-hardening] [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame Ownership (XPFO)

2016-09-14 Thread Mark Rutland
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:36:34AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 09:18:58AM +0200, Juerg Haefliger wrote: > > This patch series adds support for XPFO which protects against 'ret2dir' > > kernel attacks. The basic idea is to enforce exclusive ownership of page > > frames by

Re: [kernel-hardening] [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame Ownership (XPFO)

2016-09-14 Thread Mark Rutland
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:36:34AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 09:18:58AM +0200, Juerg Haefliger wrote: > > This patch series adds support for XPFO which protects against 'ret2dir' > > kernel attacks. The basic idea is to enforce exclusive ownership of page > > frames by

Re: [kernel-hardening] [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame Ownership (XPFO)

2016-09-14 Thread Mark Rutland
Hi, On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 09:18:58AM +0200, Juerg Haefliger wrote: > This patch series adds support for XPFO which protects against 'ret2dir' > kernel attacks. The basic idea is to enforce exclusive ownership of page > frames by either the kernel or userspace, unless explicitly requested by >

Re: [kernel-hardening] [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame Ownership (XPFO)

2016-09-14 Thread Mark Rutland
Hi, On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 09:18:58AM +0200, Juerg Haefliger wrote: > This patch series adds support for XPFO which protects against 'ret2dir' > kernel attacks. The basic idea is to enforce exclusive ownership of page > frames by either the kernel or userspace, unless explicitly requested by >

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame Ownership (XPFO)

2016-09-14 Thread Juerg Haefliger
Resending to include the kernel-hardening list. Sorry, I wasn't subscribed with the correct email address when I sent this the first time. ...Juerg On 09/14/2016 09:18 AM, Juerg Haefliger wrote: > Changes from: > v1 -> v2: > - Moved the code from arch/x86/mm/ to mm/ since it's (mostly) >

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame Ownership (XPFO)

2016-09-14 Thread Juerg Haefliger
Resending to include the kernel-hardening list. Sorry, I wasn't subscribed with the correct email address when I sent this the first time. ...Juerg On 09/14/2016 09:18 AM, Juerg Haefliger wrote: > Changes from: > v1 -> v2: > - Moved the code from arch/x86/mm/ to mm/ since it's (mostly) >

[RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame Ownership (XPFO)

2016-09-14 Thread Juerg Haefliger
Changes from: v1 -> v2: - Moved the code from arch/x86/mm/ to mm/ since it's (mostly) arch-agnostic. - Moved the config to the generic layer and added ARCH_SUPPORTS_XPFO for x86. - Use page_ext for the additional per-page data. - Removed the clearing of pages. This

[RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame Ownership (XPFO)

2016-09-14 Thread Juerg Haefliger
Changes from: v1 -> v2: - Moved the code from arch/x86/mm/ to mm/ since it's (mostly) arch-agnostic. - Moved the config to the generic layer and added ARCH_SUPPORTS_XPFO for x86. - Use page_ext for the additional per-page data. - Removed the clearing of pages. This

[RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame Ownership (XPFO)

2016-09-02 Thread Juerg Haefliger
Changes from: v1 -> v2: - Moved the code from arch/x86/mm/ to mm/ since it's (mostly) arch-agnostic. - Moved the config to the generic layer and added ARCH_SUPPORTS_XPFO for x86. - Use page_ext for the additional per-page data. - Removed the clearing of pages. This

[RFC PATCH v2 0/3] Add support for eXclusive Page Frame Ownership (XPFO)

2016-09-02 Thread Juerg Haefliger
Changes from: v1 -> v2: - Moved the code from arch/x86/mm/ to mm/ since it's (mostly) arch-agnostic. - Moved the config to the generic layer and added ARCH_SUPPORTS_XPFO for x86. - Use page_ext for the additional per-page data. - Removed the clearing of pages. This