linux-kernel - Re: System call interposition/unprotecting the table

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070814234206.76121d02@the-village.bc.nu>
Date:	Tue, 14 Aug 2007 23:42:06 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Hajime Inoue <hinoue@...l.carleton.ca>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: System call interposition/unprotecting the table

> So even with Alan's hypervisor support the whole thing would be still
> quite holey.  The argument of raising the bar also doesn't seem very

Its materially harder, especially with the hypervisor.

> convincing to me, because attackers reuse code too and it's enough
> when someone publishes such code once, then they can cut'n'paste
> it into any exploits forever.

Then you fix the specific case and the game continues.

> In general the .data protection is only considered a debugging
> feature. I don't know why Fedora enables it in their production
> kernels.

That would be because we think you are wrong 8)

Alan
-
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/