Re: [PATCH] hardening: add PROT_FINAL prot flag to mmap/mprotect

[Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>]

On Tue, 2 Oct 2012, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 15:10:56 -0700
> Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> 
> > >> Has there been any more progress on this patch over-all?
> > >
> > > No progress.
> > 
> > Al, Andrew, anyone? Thoughts on this?
> > (First email is https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/8/14/448)
> 
> Wasn't cc'ed, missed it.
> 
> The patch looks straightforward enough.  Have the maintainers of the
> runtime linker (I guess that's glibc) provided any feedback on the
> proposal?

It looks reasonable to me too.  I checked through VM_MAYflag handling
and don't expect surprises (a few places already turn off VM_MAYWRITE
in much the same way that this does, I hadn't realized).

I'm disappointed to find that our mmap() is lax about checking its
PROT and MAP args, so old kernels will accept PROT_FINAL but do
nothing with it.  Luckily mprotect() is stricter, so that can be
used to check for whether it's supported.

The patch does need to be slightly extended though: alpha, mips,
parisc and xtensa have their own include/asm/mman.h, which does
not include asm-generic/mman-common.h at all.

Hugh

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>