linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] module: add syscall to load module from fd

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:	Wed, 10 Oct 2012 00:03:41 +0200
From:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] module: add syscall to load module from fd

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 11:58 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 05:54 AM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
>> Kees,
>>
>>> +SYSCALL_DEFINE2(finit_module, int, fd, const char __user *, uargs)
>>
>> Given the repeated experience of the last few years--new system calls
>> that are in essence revisions of older system calls with a 'flags'
>> argument bolted on to allow more flexible behavior (e.g., accept4(),
>> dup3(), utimensat(), epoll_create1(), pipe2(), inotify_init(1), and so
>> on.)--maybe it is worth considering adding a 'flags' bit mask
>> argument[1] to the finti_module() system call now, to allow for
>> possible future extensions to the behavior of the interface. What do
>> you think?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> [1] Yes, I know that init_module() doesn't have a flags argument, but
>> that interface was added when we'd seen fewer of the kinds of cases
>> listed above.
>>
>
> Then maybe go whole hog and make it an init_module_at() system call
> (allowing NULL for the pathname half to implement finit_module())...?

Good point. A "whole hog" openat()-style interface is worth thinking about too.

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://man7.org/tlpi/
--
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/