linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] allow kernel module exclusion on load

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 17 May 2007 00:09:22 +0300
From:	Dan Aloni <da-x@...atomic.org>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] allow kernel module exclusion on load

On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 07:33:21PM +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2007-05-16 19:51:07, Dan Aloni wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 08:23:11AM +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Sun 2007-05-13 19:20:35, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 09:23:52AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, 13 May 2007 16:25:17 +0300
> > > > > Dan Aloni <da-x@...atomic.org> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Kernel developers might find it useful for quickly getting out from some 
> > > > > > rough debugging scenarios.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Aloni <da-x@...atomic.org>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > There is already the modprobe blacklist ability in user space.
> > > > 
> > > > doesn't really help if hotplug loads a broken module before you're getting
> > > > a login prompt.  So while this is a bit of a hack I'm all in favour of this.
> > > > (Especially as I got hit by this issue again yesterday)
> > > 
> > > It is quite a bick hack. Unknown kernel parameters are passed to init,
> > > can we just make modprobe parse that?
> > 
> > We can, and then we also have to patch busybox's own fork of modprobe
> > and every other code out there that does the same thing (not so much, 
> > but still).
> 
> Too lazy to fix userspace so lets break kernel?
> 
> No, thanks.

I wouldn't consider it breaking, more like extending. But regardless 
of userspace, in the future we can also use this same interface in 
order to disable _built-in_ kernel modules and functionlity (e.g.
'nousb' could turn into something more canonical). This can be useful 
for people working in the embedded who compile module-less kernels (if 
module-less kernels are considered bad practicle these days, I'd like
to know more).

Just a thought..

One can even come up with a kernel parameter that allows a developer 
to skip a call to one or more of the initcall functions based on 
its name only even with !CONFIG_KALLSYMS (looks like that except 
for crypto/, almost all initcalls have unique names these days).

-- 
Dan Aloni
XIV LTD, http://www.xivstorage.com
da-x (at) monatomic.org, dan (at) xiv.co.il
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/