linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] x86: restrict pid namespaces to 32 or 64 bit syscalls

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: <632d03b0-6725-431e-b100-13f5046b03e9@email.android.com>
Date:	Sat, 13 Aug 2011 22:08:57 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC:	Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] x86: restrict pid namespaces to 32 or 64 bit syscalls

Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:

>"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> writes:
>>
>> IA64 is totally different.  I'm extremely sceptical to this patch; it
>feels like putting code in a super-hot path to paper over a problem
>that has to be fixed anyway.
>
>Sounds to me a better alternative would be more aggressive, pro-active
>fuzzing of the compat calls.
>
>-Andi
>
>-- 
>ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only

Agreed.  Other than that, I can see a fine-grained permission filter, but the compat vs noncompat axis is just spurious.
-- 
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse my brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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/