linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kptr_restrict for hiding kernel pointers from unprivileged users

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: <1291898801.2965.6.camel@Dan>
Date:	Thu, 09 Dec 2010 07:46:41 -0500
From:	Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kptr_restrict for hiding kernel pointers from
 unprivileged users


> > So caller can not block BH ?
> > 
> > This seems wrong to me, please consider :
> > 
> > normal process context :
> > 
> > spin_lock_bh() ...
> > 
> > for (...)  
> > 	{xxx}printf( ...   "%pK"   ...)
> > 
> > spin_unlock_bh();
> > 
> 
> I will think about this and address it.

Would you be happier if I omitted the in_interrupt() check entirely?

-Dan

--
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/