Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758358Ab1EaU11 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 May 2011 16:27:27 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:60300 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757269Ab1EaU10 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 May 2011 16:27:26 -0400 Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 22:27:12 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Dan Rosenberg , Matthew Garrett , Tony Luck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kees.cook@canonical.com, davej@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, adobriyan@gmail.com, eranian@google.com, penberg@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, Arjan van de Ven , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Andrew Morton , pageexec@freemail.hu, Vivek Goyal Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Randomize kernel base address on boot Message-ID: <20110531202712.GB28731@elte.hu> References: <1306269105.21443.20.camel@dan> <1306442367.2279.25.camel@dan> <20110531165252.GB8971@srcf.ucam.org> <4DE5360D.5070809@zytor.com> <20110531185122.GA11998@srcf.ucam.org> <1306868609.6317.25.camel@dan> <20110531195551.GC26970@elte.hu> <4DE54C66.10106@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4DE54C66.10106@zytor.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.3.1 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 905 Lines: 29 * H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 05/31/2011 12:55 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > So ... could you *please* not shelf this idea just because people > > used lkml for what it was invented: argued with each other rather > > forcefully? :-) > > The real issue is that if it can be (semi)trivially bypassed, then > there may not be much reason to do it. Sure. > Other than that, Ingo's idea at least have the merit that it would > break only older bootloaders doing things wrong. I'm wondering, why would it break older bootloaders? It's just a slightly larger than usual kernel image, nothing is visible to the bootloader. Thanks, Ingo -- 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/