linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] enhancing the kernel's graphics subsystem

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:	Mon, 21 May 2007 13:29:32 -0400
From:	"Jon Smirl" <jonsmirl@...il.com>
To:	"Dave Airlie" <airlied@...il.com>
Cc:	"Jesse Barnes" <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	"Jesse Barnes" <jesse.barnes@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Antonino A. Daplas" <adaplas@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] enhancing the kernel's graphics subsystem

On 5/21/07, Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com> wrote:
> > 3) Eliminate the need for a root priv controlling process. Get rid of
> > the potential for a security hole.
>
> Stupid idea, we need something to control policy, this isn't going in
> the kernel, it can be a lot smaller than X and auditable.. sticking
> the DRI protocol in the kernel is just pointless..

Try to be more flexible with your thinking. It is ok to have a
transient, privileged command line app that does something like assign
an output to be under the control of a specific CRTC. I have no
problem with some of the IOCTLs requiring root priv.

What is not ok is to require a permanently running root priv process.
If the code is going to always be running make it as small as possible
and put it in the device driver.

-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@...il.com
-
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/