#20957: Get DieHarder working with Tor Browser --------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: arthuredelstein | Owner: tbb-team Type: defect | Status: needs_revision Priority: Medium | Milestone: Component: Applications/Tor Browser | Version: Severity: Normal | Resolution: Keywords: tbb-hardened | Actual Points: Parent ID: #20955 | Points: Reviewer: | Sponsor: --------------------------------------+--------------------------------
Comment (by cypherpunks): Replying to [comment:7 tom]: > I'll (try to) compare DieHard to PartitionAlloc/Copperhead: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/10281#comment:49 > > Some of the features I see in DieHard (I don't think this is exhaustive): > - randomized freelist selection > - randomized allocation placement (to some degree I assume) > - random bytes written on free > > I don't believe they have any partitioning support. In general, it seems DieHarder is somewhat comparable to Coppherhead's allocator. It may have or lack a few small features that the other has. The lack of partitioning is the main strike against it. Perhaps someone should consult strcat (the Copperhead developer) on this subject. I have a feeling that he will be able to point out downfalls in the DieHarder approach, as well as the future plans for the Copperhead allocator (which is an improved hybrid between bionic's malloc and OpenBSD's malloc). I believe strcat will be the best person to ask, as he is very familiar with memory allocators (e.g. he's planning on upstreaming a hardened slab allocator to Linux), and he's often very willing to talk. Memory allocator hardening is a tricky issue, subject to a lot of subtle nuances. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/20957#comment:10> Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/> The Tor Project: anonymity online _______________________________________________ tor-bugs mailing list tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs