linux-kernel - Re: [1/2] 2.6.22-rc5: known regressions with patches

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]

Message-ID: <5640c7e00706201541g3ecaf8c5i524d8b464d8fcc2d@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 21 Jun 2007 10:41:41 +1200
From:	"Ian McDonald" <ian.mcdonald@...di.co.nz>
To:	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Miklos Szeredi" <miklos@...redi.hu>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com>, "Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>,
	"Bj?rn Steinbrink" <B.Steinbrink@....de>,
	"William Cohen" <wcohen@...hat.com>,
	"S. P. Prasanna" <prasanna@...ibm.com>,
	"Antonino Daplas" <adaplas@...il.com>,
	"Olaf Hering" <olaf@...fle.de>, "Ville Syrj?l?" <syrjala@....fi>,
	"Jean Delvare" <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	"Rudolf Marek" <r.marek@...embler.cz>,
	"Soeren Sonnenburg" <kernel@....de>,
	"Michal Piotrowski" <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [1/2] 2.6.22-rc5: known regressions with patches

On 6/21/07, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Well, for 2.6.22, Kprobes will just be disabled if you use DEBUG_RODATA.
>
> And yes, that patch already got merged. However, the patch to *allow*
> Kprobes with DEBUG_RODATA is not, and will not be. It's not a regression,
> and quite frankly, I don't think I would even want that patch.
>
> Kprobes fundamntally disagrees with DEBUG_RODATA, there's no point in
> "working around it". Better just admit it.
>
>                 Linus
>
It depends on the purpose of DEBUG_RODATA.  If DEBUG_RODATA was for
security reasons then I agree, but it seems to be more to catch
accidental writes. Kprobes isn't an accidental write and I would
suspect many developers would want to catch accidental writes and be
able to insert kprobes.

Or is there something else I'm missing - i.e. you're saying the patch
itself is crap?

Ian

-- 
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4/
Blog: http://iansblog.jandi.co.nz
WAND Network Research Group
-
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/