From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2621C19F2B for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2022 10:42:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232418AbiHDKmH (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2022 06:42:07 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37798 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229575AbiHDKmE (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2022 06:42:04 -0400 Received: from mail.ispras.ru (mail.ispras.ru [83.149.199.84]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 558A42AC54; Thu, 4 Aug 2022 03:42:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.ispras.ru (unknown [83.149.199.84]) by mail.ispras.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B95740D403D; Thu, 4 Aug 2022 10:41:58 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2022 13:41:58 +0300 From: Evgeniy Baskov To: Dave Hansen Cc: Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Khoroshilov , linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] x86_64: Harden compressed kernel, part 1 In-Reply-To: <973736db-2480-bbaa-d2ce-6e1b6dd2ed0c@intel.com> References: <893da11995f93a7ea8f7485d17bf356a@ispras.ru> <29312ea704885f1b8d3c229e1f22dad7@ispras.ru> <973736db-2480-bbaa-d2ce-6e1b6dd2ed0c@intel.com> User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.4 Message-ID: <09c1c94fb9c5006199d88caa88f237a3@ispras.ru> X-Sender: baskov@ispras.ru Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2022-08-03 17:05, Dave Hansen wrote: > > That shows me that it's _possible_ to build a more strict PE loader > that > wouldn't load Linux. But, in practice is anyone using a more strict PE > loader? Does anyone actually want that in practice? Or, again, is > this > more strict PE loader just an academic demonstration? > > The README starts: > > This branch demonstrates... > > That doesn't seem like something that's _important_ to deal with. > Sounds like a proof-of-concept. > > Don't get me wrong, I'm all for improving thing, even if the benefits > are far off. But, let's not fool ourselves. We have commercial closed-source UEFI firmware implementation at ISP RAS that follows the behavior of the secure_pe branch. That firmware is used as a part of [1]. [1] https://www.ispras.ru/en/technologies/asperitas/ Thanks, Evgeniy Baskov