[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51A0B4E7.4030307@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 14:56:07 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: PING^7 (was Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] Corrections and customization
of the SG_IO command whitelist (CVE-2012-4542))
Il 25/05/2013 14:48, Tejun Heo ha scritto:
>>> * Merge the patch to give out SG_IO access along with write access, so
>>> > > the use cases which want to give out SG_IO access can do so
>>> > > explicitly and be fully responsible for the device. This makes
>>> > > sense to me. If one wants to be allowed to issue raw commands to
>>> > > the hardware, one takes the full responsibility.
>> >
>> > That's not possible; it would make it impossible to do things like using
>> > a privileged helper to open the file and passing it back via SCM_RIGHTS
>> > to an unprivileged program (running as the user). This is the ptrace
>> > attack that you mentioned.
> I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm describing the same
> thing you implemented and posted.
Ok, I think we need a rewind. I'll try to post what I mean next week.
Paolo
--
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