linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86-64, vsyscalls: Rename UNSAFE_VSYSCALLS to COMPAT

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, 06 Jun 2011 13:20:08 +0200
From:	pageexec@...email.hu
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@....edu>, x86@...nel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>,
	richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
	Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
	Louis Rilling <Louis.Rilling@...labs.com>,
	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64, vsyscalls: Rename UNSAFE_VSYSCALLS to COMPAT_VSYSCALLS

On 6 Jun 2011 at 12:24, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> 
> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@....edu> wrote:
> > > CONFIG_UNSAFE_VSYSCALLS was added in the previous patch as a
> > > temporary hack to avoid penalizing users who don't build glibc from
> > > git.
> > 
> > I really hate that name.
> > 
> > Do you have *any* reason to call this "unsafe"?
> 
> No, there's no reason at all for that. That naming is borderline 
> security FUD and last time i saw the series i considered renaming
> it but got distracted :-)

security FUD? for real? ;) does that mean that you guys would accept a patch
that would map the vdso at a fixed address for old times's sake? if not, on
what grounds would you refuse it? see, you can't have it both ways.

the fixed address of the vsyscall page *is* a very real security problem, it
should have never been accepted as such and it's high time it went away finally
in 2011AD.

--
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/