linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] syscalls, x86: Add __NR

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:	Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:46:57 -0500
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
To:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
CC:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrey Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu" <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>
Subject: Re: [RFC] syscalls, x86: Add __NR_kcmp syscall

(1/18/12 6:57 AM), Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 04:23:24AM -0500, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>> (1/18/12 4:19 AM), Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>>>> I think Eric only said gt/lt compare is useful. We don't need to expose bare
>>>> pointer order. example, kcmp(rotate(ptr, per-task-random-value)) is enough
>>>> hide the critical information. I think.
>>>
>>> The per-task might break thinks up in case
>>>
>>> (tsk1->file != tsk2->file)&&   (rotate(tsk1->file, tsk1->random) == rotate(tsk2->file, tsk2->rotate))
>>
>> I meant,
>>
>> (tsk1->file != tsk2->file)&&  (rotate(tsk1->file, caller_task->random) == rotate(tsk2->file, caller_task->random))
>>
>>
>>>
>>> but I agree, that the overall idea of comparing not bare pointers, but those poisoned with
>>> some global value can address the Peter's concerns about rootkits.
>
> Guys, can we stick with something simplier? I could use hashes here (again?!) or
> even aes encoded pointers extended to 128 bits as it was proposed too. But
> maybe we can live with something more simplier?

The problem of hashes is,

  - SHA1 didn't provide correct "equal or not" policy. (and I don't think sha1 is faster than kcmp)
  - Poisoned pointer can be used to restore original bare pointer.

Do this have the same issue?


> We could export EQ/NE for regular users (which might be usefull for less
> frequently used objects such as namespaces I guess). And GT/LT for root
> only.
>
> Does it look better? Does the change log tells enough?

I dislike. Just EQ/NE is better than "root only" behavior change. it's misleading.
If you dislike GT/LT, please just delete it.

--
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/