Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261152AbVA2RDa (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:03:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261341AbVA2RDa (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:03:30 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.202.56]:942 "EHLO sccrmhc12.comcast.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261152AbVA2RDU (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:03:20 -0500 Message-ID: <41FBC200.9050404@comcast.net> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:04:00 -0500 From: John Richard Moser User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041211) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arjan van de Ven CC: Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org Subject: Re: Patch 4/6 randomize the stack pointer References: <20050127101117.GA9760@infradead.org> <20050127101322.GE9760@infradead.org> <41F92721.1030903@comcast.net> <1106848051.5624.110.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <41F92D2B.4090302@comcast.net> <41F95F79.6080904@comcast.net> <1106862801.5624.145.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <41F96C7D.9000506@comcast.net> <41FB2DD2.1070405@comcast.net> <1106986224.4174.65.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <41FBB821.3000403@comcast.net> <1107017218.4174.130.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> In-Reply-To: <1107017218.4174.130.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.89.5.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3917 Lines: 104 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Sat, 2005-01-29 at 11:21 -0500, John Richard Moser wrote: > >>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>Hash: SHA1 >> >> >> >>Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> >>>>I actually just tried to paxtest a fresh Fedora Core 3, unadultered, >>>>that I installed, and it FAILED every test. After a while, spender >>>>reminded me about PT_GNU_STACK. It failed everything but the Executable >>>>Stack test after execstack -c *. The randomization tests gave >>>>13(heap-etexec), 16(heap-etdyn), 17(stack), and none for main exec >>>>(etexec,et_dyn) or shared library randomization. >>> >>> >>>because you ran prelink. >>>and you did not compile paxtest with -fPIE -pie to make it a PIE >>>executable. >>> > > > what I get is > > Executable anonymous mapping : Killed > Executable bss : Killed > Executable data : Vulnerable > Executable heap : Killed > Executable stack : Killed > Executable anonymous mapping (mprotect) : Vulnerable > Executable bss (mprotect) : Vulnerable > Executable data (mprotect) : Vulnerable > Executable heap (mprotect) : Vulnerable > Executable shared library bss (mprotect) : Vulnerable > Executable shared library data (mprotect): Vulnerable > Executable stack (mprotect) : Vulnerable > Anonymous mapping randomisation test : No randomisation > Heap randomisation test (ET_EXEC) : 13 bits (guessed) > Heap randomisation test (ET_DYN) : 13 bits (guessed) > Main executable randomisation (ET_EXEC) : 12 bits (guessed) > Main executable randomisation (ET_DYN) : 12 bits (guessed) > Shared library randomisation test : 12 bits (guessed) > Stack randomisation test (SEGMEXEC) : 17 bits (guessed) > Stack randomisation test (PAGEEXEC) : 17 bits (guessed) > Return to function (strcpy) : paxtest: bad luck, try > different compiler options. > Return to function (strcpy, RANDEXEC) : paxtest: bad luck, try > different compiler options. > Return to function (memcpy) : Vulnerable > Return to function (memcpy, RANDEXEC) : Vulnerable > Executable shared library bss : Killed > Executable shared library data : Killed > Writable text segments : Vulnerable > > > I'm not entirely happy yet (it shows a bug in mmap randomisation) but > it's way better than what you get in your tests (this is the desabotaged > 0.9.6 version fwiw) > I used 0.9.6 too, it had a slight bug in the randomization test (getmain.c), which I pointed out in another post. void foo( int unused ) { printf( "%p\n", __builtin_return_address(0) ); //printf( "0x%08x\n", ((unsigned long*)&unused)[-1] ); } I'm curious as to what the hell you're doing to get these results. Exec Shield came with the sysctl sys/kernel/exec-shield = 1 and sys/kernel/exec-shield-randomize = 1. I tried exec-shield = 0, 1, 2, and 3 and couldn't get anything but the stack to kill on a Barton cored 32 bit athlon xp. The tests I did were on a Fedora Core 3 i net-installed last night, no adulteration. Whatever black magic you're doing, it's not working here. > > - -- All content of all messages exchanged herein are left in the Public Domain, unless otherwise explicitly stated. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFB+8H/hDd4aOud5P8RAlIEAJkBwhIxdrXZ+jNz46oRg1SoSPmOHQCgiWfJ HxzCBB43i6iLLhli5boKzoM= =etT7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/