On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 12:39 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On December 8, 2015 12:30:06 PM PST, Kees Cook wrote:
>>On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:25:57PM +, Matt Fleming wrote:
On Mon, 07 Dec, at 11:10:43PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 12:39 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On December 8, 2015 12:30:06 PM PST, Kees Cook wrote:
>>On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:25:57PM +, Matt Fleming wrote:
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:30:06PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> If we add this for not-nx, I would like to add it for not-rodata too.
The W+X thing?
I was under the impression we want to fix all those so that the ptdump
check doesn't fire anymore.
> I've never seen anyone actually use it. I was
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:39:14PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Actually I think of it much more as a debug option - being able to
> mimic NX-unaware hardware and to track down problems in the field.
Considering it can be dangerous when exposed to the user, should we hide
it behind a "Kernel
On December 8, 2015 12:30:06 PM PST, Kees Cook wrote:
>On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:25:57PM +, Matt Fleming wrote:
>>> On Mon, 07 Dec, at 11:10:43PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Thank you pointing that out.
>>> >
>>> >
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:25:57PM +, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Dec, at 11:10:43PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> >
>> > Thank you pointing that out.
>> >
>> > linux-4.4-rc3 booted without a problem on a real server even with XD
>>
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:25:57PM +, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Dec, at 11:10:43PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> >
> > Thank you pointing that out.
> >
> > linux-4.4-rc3 booted without a problem on a real server even with XD
> > turned off by the firmware. I didn't notice this before
On Mon, 07 Dec, at 11:10:43PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>
> Thank you pointing that out.
>
> linux-4.4-rc3 booted without a problem on a real server even with XD
> turned off by the firmware. I didn't notice this before because I was
> using an older version of the kernel on the real server, and
On Mon, 07 Dec, at 11:10:43PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>
> Thank you pointing that out.
>
> linux-4.4-rc3 booted without a problem on a real server even with XD
> turned off by the firmware. I didn't notice this before because I was
> using an older version of the kernel on the real server, and
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:25:57PM +, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Dec, at 11:10:43PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> >
> > Thank you pointing that out.
> >
> > linux-4.4-rc3 booted without a problem on a real server even with XD
> > turned off by the firmware. I didn't notice this before
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:25:57PM +, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Dec, at 11:10:43PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> >
>> > Thank you pointing that out.
>> >
>> > linux-4.4-rc3 booted without a problem on a real server
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:30:06PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> If we add this for not-nx, I would like to add it for not-rodata too.
The W+X thing?
I was under the impression we want to fix all those so that the ptdump
check doesn't fire anymore.
> I've never seen anyone actually use it. I was
On December 8, 2015 12:30:06 PM PST, Kees Cook wrote:
>On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:25:57PM +, Matt Fleming wrote:
>>> On Mon, 07 Dec, at 11:10:43PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Thank you
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 12:39:14PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Actually I think of it much more as a debug option - being able to
> mimic NX-unaware hardware and to track down problems in the field.
Considering it can be dangerous when exposed to the user, should we hide
it behind a "Kernel
Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Dec, at 11:58:33PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> The kernel panics early in boot on a x86_64 server if the eXecute
>> Disable (XD) bit is set to disabled in the uEFI firmware. The message
>> in the kernel log buffer looks like below.
>>
Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Dec, at 11:58:33PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
>> The kernel panics early in boot on a x86_64 server if the eXecute
>> Disable (XD) bit is set to disabled in the uEFI firmware. The message
>> in the kernel log buffer looks like below.
>>
On Thu, 03 Dec, at 11:58:33PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> The kernel panics early in boot on a x86_64 server if the eXecute
> Disable (XD) bit is set to disabled in the uEFI firmware. The message
> in the kernel log buffer looks like below.
>
On Thu, 03 Dec, at 11:58:33PM, Kosuke Tatsukawa wrote:
> The kernel panics early in boot on a x86_64 server if the eXecute
> Disable (XD) bit is set to disabled in the uEFI firmware. The message
> in the kernel log buffer looks like below.
>
The kernel panics early in boot on a x86_64 server if the eXecute
Disable (XD) bit is set to disabled in the uEFI firmware. The message
in the kernel log buffer looks like below.
[0.00] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper
The kernel panics early in boot on a x86_64 server if the eXecute
Disable (XD) bit is set to disabled in the uEFI firmware. The message
in the kernel log buffer looks like below.
[0.00] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper
20 matches
Mail list logo