linux-kernel - Re: Turn CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM in sysctl dev.mem.restricted

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: <20081116171952.632947a7@kopernikus.site>
Date:	Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:19:52 +0100
From:	Bernhard Walle <bwalle@...e.de>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	crash-utility@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Turn CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM in sysctl dev.mem.restricted

* Arjan van de Ven [2008-11-16 08:03]:

> 
> the point of the /dev/mem restrictions is to not allow things you know
> you don't need, while still allowing X to function where it can access
> the crap it does. Now in Bernhard's case he DOES need them, so he
> shouldn't use the restrictions.

Right. But shipping two kernel images is a bit too much to turn a
restriction on or off. Get away from that "recompile your kernel".

But I get more and more convinced that we really want to just turn that
configuration option off. I'm no expert in security, and at some point,
I just have to believe what people write.


Regards,
Bernhard
--
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/