From 1991da2ea96cb1f67f48b687ca7e010346d3fb31 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alexander Popov Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 23:17:46 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] Add the link to @BlackIkeEagle article --- README.md | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 3e95e95..b2a62bd 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -248,9 +248,17 @@ __A:__ I personally don't support this recommendation because it provides easy d attacks for the whole system (kernel oops is not a rare situation). I think having `CONFIG_BUG` is enough here -- if we have a kernel oops in the process context, the offending/attacking process is killed. +
+ +__Q:__ What about performance impact of these kernel hardening options? + +__A:__ Ike Devolder [@BlackIkeEagle][7] made some performance tests and described the results in [this article][8]. + [1]: http://kernsec.org/wiki/index.php/Kernel_Self_Protection_Project/Recommended_Settings [2]: https://docs.clip-os.org/clipos/kernel.html#configuration [3]: https://grsecurity.net/ [4]: https://github.com/a13xp0p0v/linux-kernel-defence-map [5]: https://lwn.net/Articles/791863/ [6]: https://github.com/a13xp0p0v/kconfig-hardened-check/issues/38 +[7]: https://github.com/BlackIkeEagle +[8]: https://blog.herecura.eu/blog/2020-05-30-kconfig-hardening-tests/ -- 2.31.1