linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: larger stack guard gap, between vmas

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: <20170705185937.GB24459@1wt.eu>
Date:   Wed, 5 Jul 2017 20:59:37 +0200
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...isc-linux.org>,
        Helge Diller <deller@....de>,
        James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
        "security@...nel.org" <security@...nel.org>,
        Qualys Security Advisory <qsa@...lys.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ximin Luo <infinity0@...ian.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: larger stack guard gap, between vmas

On Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 09:17:59AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
(...)
> The good news is that this is probably specialized enough that we can
> just keep the defaults as "will break this one case, but we give
> people the tools to work around it".
> 
> I hate doing that, but distros that still support 32-bit (which is
> apparently a shrinking number) can maybe hack the libreoffice launch
> scripts up?

Don't you think that the option of having a sysctl to relax the check
per task wouldn't be easier for distros and safer overall ? Ie, emit
a warning the first time the gap is hit instead of segfaulting, then
reduce it to something that used to work (4k or 64k, I don't remember)
and try again ? It would quickly report all these "special" programs
for end-user distros, without leaving too much room for attacks due
to the warning making it pretty obvious what's going on. I just don't
know how to place this stack gap per process but since this was already
discussed for prctl I think it's doable.

Willy