Re: [PATCH] ELF: implement AT_RANDOM for future glibc use
- From: Kees Cook <kees.cook@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 22:15:43 -0700
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 05:52:58PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
I think the safe available AT_* values to use are 25, 26.
Out of curiosity, why are there gaps? I figure I can include some
comments in that header to explain the gaps for future AT_* creations.
I would configure the size in bytes. Ulrich suggested it be 16 bytes on
both 32-bit and 64-bit machines.
I was trying to make the size compile-time static so I could avoid
kmalloc'ing a buffer for get_random_bytes(). But maybe avoid that isn't
sensible?
As for 16 bytes on both 32bit and 64bit, I was aiming to have 4
pointer-sized random values. 16 works for 32bit, but I was hoping to
have 32 on 64bit. Perhaps I am over-estimating?
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Ubuntu Security Team
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] ELF: implement AT_RANDOM for future glibc use
- From: Roland McGrath
- Re: [PATCH] ELF: implement AT_RANDOM for future glibc use
- References:
- [PATCH] ELF: implement AT_RANDOM for future glibc use
- From: Kees Cook
- Re: [PATCH] ELF: implement AT_RANDOM for future glibc use
- From: Roland McGrath
- [PATCH] ELF: implement AT_RANDOM for future glibc use
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch] mm: pageable memory allocator (for DRM-GEM?)
- Next by Date: [PATCH 2/2] x86: signal: remove indent in restore_sigcontext()
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] ELF: implement AT_RANDOM for future glibc use
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] ELF: implement AT_RANDOM for future glibc use
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
