On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 06:50:18PM +0200, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
On 04/04/2024 01:35, Deepak Gupta wrote:
As discussed extensively in the changelog for the addition of this
syscall on x86 ("x86/shstk: Introduce map_shadow_stack syscall") the
existing mmap() and madvise() syscalls do not map ent
On 04/04/2024 01:35, Deepak Gupta wrote:
As discussed extensively in the changelog for the addition of this
syscall on x86 ("x86/shstk: Introduce map_shadow_stack syscall") the
existing mmap() and madvise() syscalls do not map entirely well onto the
security requirements for shadow stack memory
As discussed extensively in the changelog for the addition of this
syscall on x86 ("x86/shstk: Introduce map_shadow_stack syscall") the
existing mmap() and madvise() syscalls do not map entirely well onto the
security requirements for shadow stack memory since they lead to windows
where memory is a
