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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1803171011100.1509@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Sat, 17 Mar 2018 10:12:15 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linuxram@...ibm.com, dave.hansen@...el.com, mpe@...erman.id.au,
        mingo@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86, pkeys: do not special case protection key 0

On Fri, 16 Mar 2018, Dave Hansen wrote:

> 
> From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> mm_pkey_is_allocated() treats pkey 0 as unallocated.  That is
> inconsistent with the manpages, and also inconsistent with
> mm->context.pkey_allocation_map.  Stop special casing it and only
> disallow values that are actually bad (< 0).
> 
> The end-user visible effect of this is that you can now use
> mprotect_pkey() to set pkey=0.
> 
> This is a bit nicer than what Ram proposed because it is simpler
> and removes special-casing for pkey 0.  On the other hand, it does
> allow applciations to pkey_free() pkey-0, but that's just a silly
> thing to do, so we are not going to protect against it.

What's the consequence of that? Application crashing and burning itself or
something more subtle?

Thanks,

	tglx

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ