linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] kptr_restrict for hiding kernel pointers

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 22 Dec 2010 12:34:44 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, jmorris@...ei.org,
	tgraf@...radead.org, eugeneteo@...nel.org, kees.cook@...onical.com,
	davem@...emloft.net, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, eparis@...isplace.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] kptr_restrict for hiding kernel pointers

On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 17:21:18 +0100
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > Le mercredi 22 d__cembre 2010 __ 08:13 -0500, Dan Rosenberg a __crit :
> > > > Hm, why is it off by default? Is there some user-space regression that is caused by 
> > > > this?
> > > > 
> > > > We really want good security measures to be active by default (and to work by 
> > > > default) - they are not worth much if they are not.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I agree entirely, but I've received a lot of resistance to these types
> > > of changes in net.  I'm afraid that if it's enabled by default, no one
> > > will actually allow use of the %pK specifier where it should be used.
> > > 
> > 
> > Actually, "net resistance" was against your first patches, using quick
> > and dirty techniques (Should I remind you some of them ?)
> > 
> > Now you have a helper, it should be easier to integrate the changes.
> 
> Great - if the concept itself wasnt objected to then i think we should flip the 
> default to on.
> 

Yes, I'll make that change.  If we get reports of breakage during
2.6.38-rcX then we can reconsider.  But if we leave the feature
disabled, we will never know...  
--
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/