linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kernel: make /proc/kallsyms mode 400 to reduce ease of attacking

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:	Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:04:47 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	david@...g.hm
Cc:	Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@...ux.intel.com>,
	Marcus Meissner <meissner@...e.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tj@...nel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu, w@....eu,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: make /proc/kallsyms mode 400 to reduce ease of attacking

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:58 AM,  <david@...g.hm> wrote:
>
> how far back do we need to maintain compatibility with userspace?
>
> Is this something that we can revisit in a few years and lock it down then?

The rule is basically "we never break user space".

But the "out" to that rule is that "if nobody notices, it's not
broken". In a few years? Who knows?

So breaking user space is a bit like trees falling in the forest. If
there's nobody around to see it, did it really break?

                   Linus
--
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/