On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 08:36:45AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 4:24 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Assuming we want this (Kees -- I was under the impression that everything in > > Android would end up with the same key otherwise?), then the question is > > do we want: > > > > - prctl() get/set operations for the key, or > > - prctl() set_random_key operation, or > > - both of the above? > > > > Part of the answer to that may lie in the requirements of CRIU, where I > > strongly suspect they need explicit get/set operations, although these > > could be gated on CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE=y. > > Oh CRIU. Yikes. I'd like the get/set to be gated by the CONFIG, yes. > No reason to allow explicit access to the key (and selected algo) if > we don't have to. As a minor aside, the PAC algorithm (which can be IMPLEMENTATION DEFINED) is fixed in HW, and cannot be selected dynamically. Thus if a process is using pointer authentication, it would not be possible for CRIU to migrate that process to a CPU with a different PAC algorithm. Thanks, Mark. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
