linux-kernel - Re: [kernel-hardening] [RFC 0/4] make call

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: <20161214231629.GA23558@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Dec 2016 15:16:29 -0800
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [RFC 0/4] make call_usermodehelper a bit more
 "safe"

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:28:18PM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > So, anyone have any better ideas?  Is this approach worth it?  Or should
> > we just go down the "whitelist" path?
> 
> I think your approach is generally better than the whitelist path. But
> maybe there's yet a third approach that involves futzing with page
> permissions at runtime. I think grsec does something similar with
> read_mostly function pointer structs. Namely, they make them read-only
> const, and then temporarily twiddle the page permissions if it needs
> to be changed while disabling preemption. There could be a particular
> class of data that needs to be "opened" and "closed" in order to
> modify. Seems like these strings would be a good use of that.

Yes, but that's a much larger issue and if that feature ever lands, we
can switch these strings over to that functionality.

thanks,

greg k-h