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]
Date:   Wed, 21 Feb 2018 10:21:04 -0800
From:   Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Joe Konno <joe.konno@...ux.intel.com>,
        "linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>,
        Jeremy Kerr <jk@...abs.org>,
        Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>,
        Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        James Bottomley <james.bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs/efivarfs: restrict inode permissions

> But it should be fairly easy to just add a 'struct ratelimit_state' to
> 'struct user_struct', and then you can easily just use
> 
>    '&file->f_cred->user->ratelimit'
> 
> and you're done. Make sure the initial root user has it unlimited, and
> limit it to something reasonable for all other user allocations.

How about uid name spaces? Someone untrusted in a container could 
create a lot of uids and switch between them.

A global rate limit seems better. While in theory it allows DoS
it's probably not worse than a lot of others we have with
other resources, and it's relatively harmless.

-Andi

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ