linux-kernel - Re: [tip:x86/mm] x86/mmap, ASLR: Do not treat unlimited-stack tasks as legacy mmap

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: <alpine.LSU.2.20.1706281134380.30709@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2017 11:40:06 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
cc:     tip-bot for Michal Hocko <tipbot@...or.com>,
        linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        mingo@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, mhocko@...e.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, davej@...emonkey.org.uk, peterz@...radead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/mm] x86/mmap, ASLR: Do not treat unlimited-stack tasks
 as legacy mmap

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> Perhaps it makes sense to reset RLIMITs on suid exec (say, if 
> bprm->per_clear is not zero) ? Yes, it is not clear how should we define 
> SANE_RLIMITS_FOR_SUID, and this should probably depend on sysctl, etc.

Hmm, this should be an userspace-defined policy. On a 'standard' 
(PAM-based) system, I think a sane expectation would be to get the same 
limits as the ones enforced by pam_limits configuration, but syncing those 
with kernel feels awkward.

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs