Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 18 Oct 2022 22:33:17 -0700 | From | Kees Cook <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86/ibt: Implement FineIBT |
| |
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 01:09:25PM -0700, Joao Moreira wrote: > On 2022-10-18 10:20, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 08:58:24AM -0700, Joao Moreira wrote: > > > > Does the hash value for kCFI only depend on the function type? > > > > Or is there something like a attribute that can also be included? > > > > > > Hi David -- does this sound like what you are asking about? > > > > > > https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/1736 > > > > > > If yes, then it is something in our todo list :) I think Sami is > > > handling > > > it. > > > > I was hoping someone with prior experience with Call Graph Detaching to > > solve Transitive Clustering Relaxation[1] could assist? ;) > > Hi Kees, thanks for bringing these slides up. > > Yeah, I would be glad to help out with automating this sort of analysis. > CGD, as explained in these slides would not help much here, because it was > more of an optimization to reduce the number of allowed targets on returns > (we did not have an almighty shadow stack at the time). Yet there are lots > of other things we might be able to do, both statically and dynamically. > Recent relevant research about this is multi-layer type analysis [1], which > I may find the time to look into more deeply soon. > > 1 - https://www-users.cse.umn.edu/~kjlu/papers/mlta.pdf
Awesome! Yeah, getting the big "common" hashes broken up by separate clusters would be lovely.
-- Kees Cook
| |