linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 00/06] printk: add more new kernel pointer filter options.

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:   Thu, 11 May 2017 10:37:37 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        William Roberts <william.c.roberts@...el.com>,
        Chris Fries <cfries@...gle.com>,
        Dave Weinstein <olorin@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/06] printk: add more new kernel pointer filter options.

Hello Greg,

On (05/05/17 21:06), Greg KH wrote:
> Here's a short patch series from Chris Fries and Dave Weinstein that
> implement some new restrictions when printing out kernel pointers, as
> well as the ability to whitelist kernel pointers where needed.
> 
> These patches are based on work from William Roberts, and also is
> inspired by grsecurity's %pP to specifically whitelist a kernel pointer,
> where it is always needed, like the last patch in the series shows, in
> the UIO drivers (UIO requires that you know the address, it's a hardware
> address, nothing wrong with seeing that...)
> 
> I haven't done much to this patch series, only forward porting it from
> an older kernel release (4.4) and a few minor tweaks.  It applies
> cleanly on top of 4.11 as well as Linus's current development tree
> (10502 patches into the 4.12-rc1 merge window).  I'm posting it now for
> comments if anyone sees anything wrong with this approach

overall, I don't see anything wrong.

> or thinks the things that are being whitelisted should not be?

can't say for sure, sorry.

	-ss