linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Reserve N process to root

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:50:14 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Gustavo Chain <g@...f.cl>
Cc:	David Newall <david@...idnewall.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Reserve N process to root

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:46:22 EDT, Gustavo Chain said:
> El Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:14:06 +0930
> David Newall <david@...idnewall.com> escribió:
> > That was what I thought you had in mind; it protects from some kind
> > of fork bomb, right?  But it doesn't seem useful unless you guarantee 
> > having a process already running (with CAP_SYS_ADMIN) *before* the
> > bomb goes off.
> 
> Not really, because fork bomb will never reach maximum pid possible.
> And root will always have a "slot" to kill desired processes.

What David meant was that "root will always have a slot" doesn't *actually*
help unless you *also* have a way to actually *spawn* such a process.  In order
to do the ps, kill, and so on that you need to recover, you need to already
have either a root shell available, or a way to *get* a root shell that doesn't
rely on a non-root process (so /bin/su doesn't help here).

Many distros will leave a /sbin/mingetty running on tty1 through tty6, and
you *can* use those to get a root shell.  David's point is that without
something like that already in place, the patch doesn't help....

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped