Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 15:14:30 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, HardenedBSD Core <core@hardenedbsd.org>, Oliver Pinter <oliver.pinter@hardenedbsd.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ASLR work into -HEAD ? Message-ID: <A637110F-A865-4924-AB06-13D7DE2631A8@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <1426878339.5550.29.camel@hardenedbsd.org> References: <CAJ-VmomszKm47aLnGWiouUQHvmB8%2BchA=y-q1zvtOwJ7_iqe0g@mail.gmail.com> <7C64CB2B-3FD0-434C-A11A-2A841537220F@bsdimp.com> <CAJ-Vmo=JZoM0V=sSNtW-2Pdh-8gtXWhAGd7uKV7v_rwECqMQJw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPQ4fftmjJ2tfAWzULoTQiY3ZO=GRP9VRt-LtzxUnoMJCZgHLw@mail.gmail.com> <CC2C8923-A3EB-4EE4-9DBB-A2CC444902BF@bsdimp.com> <1426875464.5550.26.camel@hardenedbsd.org> <1426878339.5550.29.camel@hardenedbsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Apple-Mail=_D7C94696-EF5C-4348-9F24-E05CC351FC5C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On Mar 20, 2015, at 1:05 PM, Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> = wrote: >=20 > On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 14:17 -0400, Shawn Webb wrote: >> On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 09:28 -0600, Warner Losh wrote: >>>> On Mar 19, 2015, at 2:31 PM, Oliver Pinter = <oliver.pinter@hardenedbsd.org> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> = wrote: >>>>> On 19 March 2015 at 12:56, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On Mar 19, 2015, at 12:53 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> = wrote: >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Apparently this is done but has stalled: >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D473 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Does anyone have any strong objections to it landing in the tree = as-is? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> There=E2=80=99s rather a lot of them specifically spelled out in = the code review. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Many of the earlier ones were kinda blown off, so I=E2=80=99ve = not been inclined >>>>>> to take the time to re-review it. Glancing at it, I see several = minor issues >>>>>> that should be cleaned up. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Cool. Thanks for taking the time to look at it again. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Shawn is in #freebsd on freenode irc, so if you/others want a more >>>>> interactive review then he's there during the day. >>>>=20 >>>> Please CC the core@hardenedbsd.org in future please, when you are >>>> talking about this issue. >>>>=20 >>>> Adrian: do you able to review the MIPS or ARM part especially or = test them? >>>=20 >>> Adrian: Do not commit the changes. >>>=20 >>> I=E2=80=99ve gone back and re-read Robert Watson=E2=80=99s rather = long review and it appears >>> that virtually none of that has been addressed. Until it is, do not = commit it. This >>> code interacts with dangerous parts of the system, and the default = cannot be >>> to just let it in because no one has objected recently. Objections = have been made, >>> they have been quantified, they haven=E2=80=99t been answered or = acted upon. Until that >>> changes, you can assume the objections remain in place and asking = again without >>> fixing them isn=E2=80=99t going to change the answer. >>>=20 >>> Warner >>=20 >> Warner, >>=20 >> We've fixed the vast majority of the concerns raised in that review. = To >> say "virtually none of that has been addressed" and "they haven't = been >> answered or acted upon" is a blatant lie. The fact that there are so >> many revisions of the patch is proof. We even made our ASLR >> implementation for FreeBSD less secure by providing a mechanism in >> ptrace() to disable it as requested by a member of the FreeBSD >> Foundation. (This "feature" doesn't exist in HardenedBSD's >> implementation.) If comments like these continue, I will remove the = diff >> from Phabricator and close the BugZilla ticket. FreeBSD can feel free = to >> pull from us, but we won't make any effort to proactively upstream = our >> work. >>=20 >> With that said, I have missed a few of the concerns raised. There's = so >> many comments/concerns in that review that it's easy to miss a few. I >> will address them tonight and upload a new patch tomorrow. >=20 > I've updated the patch. Is there anything I've missed? I=E2=80=99ve taken a look at the updated patch and see that it addressed = the issues I raised. It almost looks like the update to the review a month ago was the wrong version, since so many more of the original comments appear to be addressed than when I looked. Thanks! Warner --Apple-Mail=_D7C94696-EF5C-4348-9F24-E05CC351FC5C Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVDI22AAoJEGwc0Sh9sBEAu+8QALGiZEBaYbyODq+zgT93HuIS CU7/NCaiVOVk2A6GqLEUgrxqFfGT306BqlJK4omsShzpSzadGs73yv2xJjqxZAVH MOlUUcJ/xvK1NZIvOU5K7r8ey9rtdk59X7R1zBzjGpi2TN6GDVhZ9MzvCciJsAUe OGkFni6Oe3bYhOVFRDX7Y0Q6gVF+m8ZkDqMbSi4QqoIQOGdia7Ijc1+6G0ZLSa1f VE7mcG0iXgFdi/xB7RDYE4xOzegDKzbxWqfBVGX5qWxm5Q3vbIpMFVoEXNAO7umK i23Z3f+EdnrunLcK7d51XdMccuXwI3nMIpdgs0DOPnbWNupBu+/YIFuxflG+FAsF iQferoEeECCSaxImH0SJd5wsQrXD0pLl6Zv1nsoKe6hoPC+RECaDJ0370p7pBvg4 wt6YlUqSNANuA4h1hE6Uetu3n6M41uNnLEWBTnOtQZhxVsUcC4m4jqtR59VwG5MF ZjLZAox4IPlzMt50P3ziueMKwgiVk9SZ4g9BN1v7v9O7tcl3HLZ/Yt1blibwjyUT dx3RvkbQ6iucjqyUfRmZjZAmnOOT0zNNcxxnVMBVR2O29fYNau41QFkdVOPnazzc LaeiUC7II+Y/ZA6jyB7O49+S77c9/INPlzJrAZTAsytZuwU91QUeIj/1lKdi1c6Q WTe946Ytb2LrCU+zvMyl =zHEy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_D7C94696-EF5C-4348-9F24-E05CC351FC5C--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A637110F-A865-4924-AB06-13D7DE2631A8>