linux-kernel - Re: [resend][PATCH] Added PR_SET_PROCTITLE

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: <3e8340490910121233j17ebeb85m69e18566978b5ba2@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:33:11 -0400
From:	Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@...il.com>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Timo Sirainen <tss@....fi>
Subject: Re: [resend][PATCH] Added PR_SET_PROCTITLE_AREA option for prctl()

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 3:03 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro
<kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Sorry for the delaying.
>
>> On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 2:32 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro
>> <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> It does seem like a maximum spin count should be put in there - and
>> >> maybe a timeout as well (since with FUSE etc it's possible to engineer
>> >> page faults that take arbitrarily long).
>> >> Also, it occurs to me that:
>> >
>> > makes sense.
>> > I like maximum spin rather than timeout.
>>
>> I'm worried about the scenario where process A sets its cmdline buffer
>> to point to a page which will take a _VERY_ long time to pagein (maybe
>> forever), and then process B goes to try to read its cmdline. What
>> happens now?
>
> Honestly, I don't worry about so much. if attacker want DoS attack, fork bomb is
> efficient than this way. then, attacker never use this.

Fork bombs and etc can be mitigated by resource limits; but if the
command line is placed on a page that will take a very long time to
fault, then that cannot be mitigated... But again, this DoS already
exists and isn't any easier with this patch, so I think it's a
separate issue.

>> Process A can arrange for this to happen by using a FUSE filesystem
>> that sits on a read forever. And since the first thing the admin's
>> likely to do to track down the problem is 'ps awux', this is liable to
>> be a rather nasty DoS...
>
> Probably, I haven't understand this paragraph. Why is this FUSE related issue?

Just an example of how one can create a page that will take a very
long time to fault in.
--
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/