linux-kernel - Re: Potential issues (security and otherwise) with the current cgroup-bpf API

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: <20161219.203422.500916400463091702.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Mon, 19 Dec 2016 20:34:22 -0500 (EST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     alexei.starovoitov@...il.com
Cc:     luto@...nel.org, daniel@...que.org, mic@...ikod.net,
        keescook@...omium.org, jann@...jh.net, tj@...nel.org,
        dsahern@...il.com, tgraf@...g.ch, mtk.manpages@...il.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Potential issues (security and otherwise) with the current
 cgroup-bpf API

From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 16:02:56 -0800

> huh? 'not right api' because it's using bpf syscall instead
> of cgroup control-file? I think the opposite is the truth.

I completely agree with Alexei on this.