[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111118234635.GB29378@google.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:46:35 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Kyle Moffett <kyle@...fetthome.net>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Checkpoint/Restore: Show in proc IDs of objects
that can be shared between tasks
Hello,
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 05:10:37PM -0500, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> The #1 rule of one-time pads is never use it for more than one thing,
> and you use it here for every object in the system.
The new version is using different poison for different types of
objects.
> If you actually want to be able to compare uniqueness without exposing
> anything vulnerable to various kinds of guessing, you should generate
> a random 64-bit value for each class of object and then use a proper
> cryptographic hash function on it:
> crypto_hash(concat(object_ptr, random_value))
>
> Even given the best possible practical attacks against SHA1 or MD5
> today both still provides more than enough security to prevent someone
> from guessing "object_ptr" in less than an absurd amount of time.
So, per-type poison + crypto hash, it is then.
Thank you very much.
--
tejun
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists