From owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org Mon May 4 15:24:11 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 725422D2C0C for ; Mon, 4 May 2020 15:24:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-il1-f169.google.com (mail-il1-f169.google.com [209.85.166.169]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49G68T6CQlz4L95 for ; Mon, 4 May 2020 15:24:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-il1-f169.google.com with SMTP id u189so11649295ilc.4 for ; Mon, 04 May 2020 08:24:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hEXJ8C38+JjHrDX0jT4gzGKSjL6xNkgTvjnlbh7og4g=; b=WfZ3JsuegOAYWsw1MXJ+2vwD32rSUgMCMF1CpqrnJe/Gyv4gzjvHBLK3GjHN9Bbixu WAiUMRsgIFhWZkMu1gwJg59q5qQTCEBPMhBqtp6fkXjjspSOKrS38OynlGStgmX5+i80 vX9R6ZsC7hpPXuAYYMf8iBEvohTZ7gJN07vEeeDStekfrFl4aPAGCcYDyjUA+5jE/KU4 Nu5L+Nyo3PT9h3eRuAGbz11c2nenjf49gv3z1HG2OPjIjoalIL9pa9mz6Dt9FFw9AFbi Eqkt5z1dlZGN57nbEY4THJneL+FmGaN62qyPPnxXw6ruI8Z8jWTKq+ZqEYQJW8ltkrpG 66Sw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYWbQRyByAQwQY4keNp2uzGV5k4lN61qLzaSTT4uGS0SymUrot1 tee5aSACbvwGVZgWQf8UE8FNQv8K4wJqBUOxNMVBDB+3 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKI+W1MdXd8ehCQn01+4rNkibH2h0AA4rAcN/SWM+/osDSLo+QU/5suP9705rCsZpRUaGPvyTmg5xD9+I1MzfQ= X-Received: by 2002:a92:cd01:: with SMTP id z1mr557128iln.182.1588605848887; Mon, 04 May 2020 08:24:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Ed Maste Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 11:23:53 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ASLR/PIE status in FreeBSD HEAD To: Marcin Wojtas Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org, Rafal Jaworowski Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 49G68T6CQlz4L95 X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of carpeddiem@gmail.com designates 209.85.166.169 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=carpeddiem@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.68 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-security@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[169.166.85.209.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; IP_SCORE(-1.68)[ip: (-7.55), ipnet: 209.85.128.0/17(-0.40), asn: 15169(-0.43), country: US(-0.05)]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[169.166.85.209.rep.mailspike.net : 127.0.0.17]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[emaste@freebsd.org,carpeddiem@gmail.com]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 May 2020 15:24:11 -0000 On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 10:22, Marcin Wojtas wrote: > > Indeed I thought of kyua and measuring buildworld execution time for > stressing the DUT and having the first comparison numbers for the low > price. > > Do you think it is possible to get help here, i.e. is there a FreeBSD > devops team, maintaining the Jenkins CI whose spare cycles could be > used for this purpose? Or is this a field requiring external help from > interested parties? There aren't a lot of spare cycles to go around, but putting automation in place so that tests like this can easily be performed is certainly something that's in the Jenkins team's domain. > Yes, making use of something actively maintained would be great. Do > you see a need for IO stressing/benchmarking for the discussed cases? In the fullness of time I think it's important, but my opinion is that it's really functional tests that we need, for enabling features in -CURRENT; we can work on benchmarking before and after changing a default.