Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 23 Jul 2014 17:45:51 -0700
From:      Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com>
To:        Pedro Giffuni <pfg@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com>, Oliver Pinter <oliver.pntr@gmail.com>, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, PaX Team <pageexec@freemail.hu>, Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: [RFC] ASLR Whitepaper and Candidate Final Patch
Message-ID:  <796EDB88-3768-48AA-B909-8A7FFBED0C1E@kientzle.com>
In-Reply-To: <D7CEDB47-2818-461A-BB70-479BEBDCEEE9@freebsd.org>
References:  <96C72773-3239-427E-A90B-D05FF0F5B782@freebsd.org> <20140720201858.GB29618@pwnie.vrt.sourcefire.com> <alpine.BSF.2.11.1407230017490.88645@fledge.watson.org> <20140723004543.GH29618@pwnie.vrt.sourcefire.com> <D7CEDB47-2818-461A-BB70-479BEBDCEEE9@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Jul 23, 2014, at 4:37 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pfg@freebsd.org> wrote:

> Hi;
>=20
> Il giorno 22/lug/2014, alle ore 19:45, Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com> =
ha scritto:
>=20
>>>> ...
>>>=20
>>> Hi Shawn:
>>>=20
>>> Great news that this work is coming to fruition -- ASLR is long =
overdue.
>>>=20
>>> Are you having any luck with performance measurements?  Unixbench =
seems like a=20
>>> good starting point, but I wonder if it would be useful to look, in=20=

>>> particular, at memory-mapping intensive workloads that might be =
affected as a=20
>>> result of changes in kernel VM data-structure use, or greater =
fragmentation of=20
>>> the address space.  I'm not sure I have a specific application here =
in mind --=20
>>> in the past I might have pointed out tools such as ElectricFence =
that tend to=20
>>> increase fragmentation themselves.
>>=20
>> The unixbench tests on that laptop have finished. However, I've been
>> fighting a pesky migraine these last couple days, so I haven't had =
the
>> opportunity to aggregate the results into a nice little spreadsheet. =
I'm
>> hoping to finish it up by the end of the week.
>>=20
>> I'll take a look at ElectricFence this weekend. Additionally, I have =
a
>> netbook somewhere. Once I find it and its power cord, I'll install
>> FreeBSD/x86 and re-run the same tests on that.
>>=20
>=20
> Somewhat related to ElectricFence=85 will ASLR have an adverse effect =
on debuggers?
>=20
> I googled around and got to this:
>=20
> http://www.outflux.net/blog/archives/2010/07/03/gdb-turns-off-aslr/
>=20
> So I guess we may have to patch gdb (and lldb)?

I suspect the issue here is that debugging often
requires multiple runs of a program with repeatable
behavior between runs.

Consider:

 * I run the program under GDB, it crashes at a certain PC address

 * I restart the program, set a breakpoint at that PC address

I want to be confident that the PC address where I=92m setting the
breakpoint will have the same meaning between runs.

Tim




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?796EDB88-3768-48AA-B909-8A7FFBED0C1E>