linux-kernel - Re: Leaking path for set_task

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: <20180926233903.38fb598a@alans-desktop>
Date:   Wed, 26 Sep 2018 23:39:03 +0100
From:   Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     TongZhang <ztong@...edu>, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
        adobriyan@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: Leaking path for set_task_comm


> Trying to depend on task name for anything security sensitive is at
> _really_ bad idea, so it seems unlikely that a LSM would want to
> protect the process name.  (And if they did, the first thing I would
> ask is "Why?  What are you trying to do?  Do you realize how many
> *other* ways the process name can be spoofed or otherwise controlled
> by a potentially malicious user?")

Two processes that should not be able to otherwise communicate can keep
changing their name to a chunk of data, waiting for an ack flag name
change back.

Alan