linux-kernel - Re: Turn CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM in sysctl dev.mem.restricted

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:	Sun, 16 Nov 2008 12:32:46 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...nel.org>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
CC:	Bernhard Walle <bwalle@...e.de>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	crash-utility@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Turn CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM in sysctl dev.mem.restricted

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
> I assume /dev/crash is read only
> 
> but your series still makes absolutely no sense to me...
> really. Nak.
> 
> You either want this at compile time or you don't want it at all.
> 

You could certainly envision this as a boottime option, or even a
*one-way* settable runtime option (kind of like the BSD securelevel
idea.)  The question is to which extent even that makes any sense.

	-hpa
--
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/