linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-net 0/4] Increase the limit of tuntap queues

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]

Message-ID: <1253769917.3166193.1416839305146.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 24 Nov 2014 09:28:25 -0500 (EST)
From:	Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@...hat.com>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, jasowang@...hat.com, dgibson@...hat.com,
	vfalico@...il.com, edumazet@...gle.com, vyasevic@...hat.com,
	hkchu@...gle.com, wuzhy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, xemul@...allels.com,
	therbert@...gle.com, bhutchings@...arflare.com, xii@...gle.com,
	stephen@...workplumber.org, jiri@...nulli.us,
	sergei shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-net 0/4] Increase the limit of tuntap queues


> On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 08:23:21PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
> > Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2014 22:30:32 +0200
> > 
> > > qemu runs in the host, but it's unpriveledged: it gets
> > > passed tun FDs by a priveledged daemon, and it only
> > > has the rights to some operations,
> > > in particular to attach and detach queues.
> > > 
> > > The assumption always was that this operation is safe
> > > and can't make kernel run out of resources.
> > 
> > This creates a rather rediculous situation in my opinion.
> > 
> > Configuring a network device is a privileged operation, the daemon
> > should be setting this thing up.
> > 
> > In no other context would we have to worry about something like this.
> 
> Right.  Jason corrected me.  I got it wrong:
> what qemu does is TUNSETQUEUE and that needs to get a queue
> that's already initialized by the daemon.
> 
> To create new queues daemon calls TUNSETIFF,
> and that already can be used to create new devices,
> so it's a priveledged operation.
> 
> This means it's safe to just drop the restriction,
> exactly as you suggested originally.

I will drop patch2 to add sysctl entry and and will send a v2 with other 
patches.

Thanks,
Pankaj

> --
> MST
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
--
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/