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: <CAHmME9p7QdAZf2NR4fkheRFVUoH1a27rmRcOnzkSS+nE5gJ63Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:40:03 +0100
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:     Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH] cpu: do not leak vulnerabilities
 to unprivileged users

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 2:34 PM, Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> As you observe any attacker can already trivially ascertain whether
> protection is on, so there is no point pretending file permissions
> magically stop that. In fact the information is already in cpuinfo.

Actually the other place it leaks is in dmesg, which would need to be
patched too.

My understanding about cpuinfo was that it showed whether or not the
processor family is generally vulnerable to it, independent of whether
or not the kernel has been patched. What this patch does relates to
whether or not the kernel has been patched.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ