Re: [PATCH crypto-2.6] lib: make memzero_explicit more robust against dead store elimination

2015-04-30 Thread mancha security
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 01:43:07AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote: On 04/29/2015 04:54 PM, mancha security wrote: On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 04:01:19PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote: On 04/29/2015 03:08 PM, mancha security wrote: ... By the way, has anyone been able to verify that __memory_barrier

Re: [PATCH crypto-2.6] lib: make memzero_explicit more robust against dead store elimination

2015-04-29 Thread mancha security
Reported-by: Stephan Mueller smuel...@chronox.de Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann dan...@iogearbox.net Cc: Theodore Ts'o ty...@mit.edu Cc: Stephan Mueller smuel...@chronox.de Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa han...@stressinduktion.org Cc: mancha security manc...@zoho.com Cc: Mark Charlebois charl

Re: [PATCH crypto-2.6] lib: make memzero_explicit more robust against dead store elimination

2015-04-29 Thread mancha security
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 04:01:19PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote: On 04/29/2015 03:08 PM, mancha security wrote: ... By the way, has anyone been able to verify that __memory_barrier provides DSE protection under various optimizations? Unfortunately, I don't have ready access to ICC

Re: [BUG/PATCH] kernel RNG and its secrets

2015-04-10 Thread mancha security
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 04:33:17PM +0200, Stephan Mueller wrote: Am Freitag, 10. April 2015, 14:22:08 schrieb mancha security: Hi mancha, __asm__ __volatile__(: :r(p) :memory) gcc -O2/3: mov present clang -O2/3: mov present == approach would be good too. Note, the assembly code