Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Crash on ARM64 Android #4

Open
zrose584 opened this issue Sep 14, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Crash on ARM64 Android #4

zrose584 opened this issue Sep 14, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@zrose584
Copy link

Hi, there seems to be a general problem with "unprotecting" the kernel regions / making them writable on newer android kernels. At least it is mentioned at different places, e.g.:

Stackoverflow Android 12 kernel 4.14.190
m0nad/Diamorphine#37

The dmesg.log

I am using 4.14 (had to make a few adjustments to the code).
On another phone with kernel 4.4 I had no issue hijacking some kernel symbols.

@liutgnu
Copy link
Collaborator

liutgnu commented Sep 15, 2023

Hi, Thanks for reporting the issue.

Do you know if the issue can be reproduced on other linux distros(fedora/debian/ubuntu etc) other than android?

Frankly I didn't follow the android development recently, so this project hasn't been tested on android for quite sometime. And I doesn't get a android 12 phone at hand and it would be time consuming to install a android emulator...

Anyway, I will look into the issue when I have time. Thanks!

@zrose584
Copy link
Author

zrose584 commented Sep 15, 2023

Do you know if the issue can be reproduced on other linux distros(fedora/debian/ubuntu etc) other than android?

No, I don't know. If you have powerful-enough arm64 hardware, maybe this can be reproduced using genymotion - they have some arm64 images: https://support.genymotion.com/hc/en-us/articles/9511224511901-Which-Android-versions-are-available-

And I doesn't get a android 12 phone

Fwiw, Kernel 4.14 seems to be used as early as Android 10 in some devices

The project bmax121/KernelPatch looks interesting, but I am not sure if it uses a (new) way to disable this "additional protection", or it just patches the kernel memory before those additional protections got activated (the project patches the kernel image file and hooks into the very early init phases)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants