linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/39] Annotate module params that specify hardware parameters (eg. ioport)

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: <20161206071104.GA10292@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 6 Dec 2016 08:11:04 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        minyard@....org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/39] Annotate module params that specify hardware
 parameters (eg. ioport)

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 09:12:27PM +0000, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 16:02:26 +0000
> David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > Also, I think Alan's comment about it the last time it came up was more like
> > > a "look at all of the other ways you could do bad things to hardware!"
> > > comment, not a "you need to also do this thing too!" type of request.  
> 
> 
> In all honesty I think both need to go in together, otherwise the first
> patch is useless. It's not a case of "oh there may be another obscure
> exploit .." , this is "I can automate it with a python script, post a
> CVE, and show I'm awesome" 8)

What about all of the ways you can change ioports dynamically from
ioctls?  Or can't python write ioctls to device nodes?  :)

thanks,

greg k-h