Am 11.11.2014 um 03:13 schrieb David Miller: > From: Andy Lutomirski <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 14:03:23 -0800 > >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
